tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post7038567645590780516..comments2023-10-10T05:30:54.239-04:00Comments on Jo-Joe Politico: THE EDGE OF THE ENDJoehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09693381971064363612noreply@blogger.comBlogger34125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-59390437716046301912012-07-02T16:27:48.520-04:002012-07-02T16:27:48.520-04:00Mark - I have considered my eternal fate and have ...Mark - I have considered my eternal fate and have concluded, based on an OVERWHELMING lack of evidence to the contrary, that there isn't one. Dead is dead. When you die you simply cease to exist. The reward you believe awaits you has no more validity than Islam's promise of 72 virgins. They are both fairy tales told to the gullible to coerce their behavior. And because you will no longer argue with me I guess I get the last word on the matter. Sweet.Xavier Onassishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01345787343828318445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-40808510603987002122012-07-01T23:56:31.143-04:002012-07-01T23:56:31.143-04:00Craig, the phrase, "Pursuit of happiness"...Craig, the phrase, "Pursuit of happiness" (not persuit) is in the Declaration of Independence. The first draft of the Declaration stated Life, Liberty, and property, and was later changed in the final draft. <br /><br />XO, "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" Romans 1:21<br /><br />I will no longer argue with you. By your admission that you don't believe in God, you have shown yourself to be a fool, and I don't argue with fools.<br /><br />Atheism doesn't end well. I urge you to consider your eternal fate before it's too late.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15633208787250567256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-88796222129531467762012-07-01T14:39:01.261-04:002012-07-01T14:39:01.261-04:00Joe, All I said was, XO didn't say what you s...Joe, All I said was, XO didn't say what you said he did about pursuit of happiness. Mark said it. I didn't say anything about his "property" statement.<br /><br /><i><br />Would that include what you have to do if you sell your house?</i><br /><br />I wouldn't have to do anything. There's a 3.8% tax on capital gains <b>over</b> $500,000 for a couple. My house isn't worth over $500K and I don't own it free and clear. If a couple sells a house for $1M that they still owed $400K on, their capital gain that would be subject to the tax would be $100K. That's a $3,800 tax on a total capital gain of $600K. They'll survive.<br /><br />Did you read it or are you regurgitating what you read on a Righty blog?Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06124629994153584904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-80447104306114331522012-07-01T10:56:05.500-04:002012-07-01T10:56:05.500-04:00Craig: As usual, liberals can't read. It was X...Craig: As usual, liberals can't read. It was XO who said, "The Constitution mentions the word "property" once."<br /><br />Actually, it mentions it several times, so XO was blatantly wrong, no matter who he was addressing.<br /><br />And don't come here telling me who I should address.<br /><br />"There are lots of good things in Obamacare..."<br /><br />Would that include what you have to do if you sell your house?<br /><br />That's in there.<br /><br />Try reading it (but be aware that it is pretty long...being a liberal, you might not be able to).Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09693381971064363612noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-74269179180020732312012-07-01T08:49:05.744-04:002012-07-01T08:49:05.744-04:00XO: "Persuit of happiness" is not in the...<i>XO: "Persuit of happiness" is not in the Constitution.</i><br /><br />This should be addressed to Mark. XO was quoting Mark.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06124629994153584904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-65064210210345782752012-07-01T07:53:05.566-04:002012-07-01T07:53:05.566-04:00XO: "Persuit of happiness" is not in the...XO: "Persuit of happiness" is not in the Constitution.Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09693381971064363612noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-41461801076660017572012-07-01T07:51:57.342-04:002012-07-01T07:51:57.342-04:00XO: "No person shall be held to answer for a ...XO: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or PROPERTY, without due process of law; nor shall private PROPERTY be taken for public use, without just compensation."<br /><br />Amendment 5<br /><br />You stand corrected.Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09693381971064363612noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-74665421999822075572012-07-01T07:44:33.660-04:002012-07-01T07:44:33.660-04:00Mark, stop digging.
but no, I don't believe e...Mark, stop digging.<br /><br /><i>but no, I don't believe even State government should compel me to buy car insurance under penalty of law...It is 100% unconstitutional.</i><br /><br />Driving is a privilege the state grants you. It can revoke that privilege for a number of reasons. It can also put conditions on that privilege like having insurance. It protects you and the other drivers.<br /><br /><i>Go ahead, Craig. Show me in the Constitution where it says the government has the right to force us to purchase anything. Go ahead.</i><br /><br />I can't. I can't show you where the Constitution says money is speech or corporations have the same rights as a person. This is a lame argument. The converse is just as true, the constitution doesn't say govt. can't make you buy something either. <br /><br />The example of the Uniform Militia Act is important because it was passed by the people who wrote the Constitution. They didn't find any problem forcing white men to buy muskets, horses, uniforms and fanny packs. No, Mark, they weren't paid. It was a condition of citizenship. The only remuneration they got is what amounted to a tax exemption on their purchases. Read the Act, I linked to it. The only opposition to the Act in Congress was from those who thought it was an undue burden on the poor. Several years later a small stipend was added to compensate for time missed from work when they mustered for training twice a year. <br /><br /><i>My money is my property. I have a right to own property, and no one. not you, and not the government, has the right to take it from me without my permission or under penalty of law. </i><br /><br />Dude, Article 1, Section 8. The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the right to tax (take your "property"). Why do you hate the Constitution?<br /><br />I'm not a big fan of the mandate either, but for different reasons. There are lots of good things in Obamacare like eliminating preexisting conditions, eliminating life time caps, allowing kids to stay on parents plan to 26, making ins. cos. spend 80% of premiums on actual health care, closing the doughnut hole in Joe's prescription coverage, etc. I understand that the mandate is a way to expand the pool of insured to cover these things. It's clumsy and guarantees 30M new customers for private ins.<br /><br />Without ACA, people like you and me, who have ins., pay for the uninsured, anyway, in higher premiums. Unless you're in the "let 'em die" camp, you'll agree that a civilized society wouldn't turn away the sick, injured and dying for lack of money. Getting everyone to pay what they can into the pool only makes sense. Of course, what would make the most sense, as Joe has unwittingly made an excellent case for, is Medicare for all. The system's in place, bump the Medicare payroll tax a few percentage points (it's currently a whopping 1.45%), write a new bill (it would fit on 1 page), you're done. We already know it's Constitutional.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06124629994153584904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-13441857398514442722012-07-01T02:18:09.308-04:002012-07-01T02:18:09.308-04:00Mark - "The Constitution does not "grant...Mark - "The Constitution does not "grant" us any rights, but merely enumerates our rights granted to us by God, such as Life, Liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and of property."<br /><br />Property?<br /><br />The Constitution mentions the word "property" once.<br /><br />"Article. IV. Section. 3.; Clause 2: The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State."<br /><br />You have NO IDEA what you are talking about. You just have some opinions.<br /><br />Stop. You're embarassing yourself.Xavier Onassishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01345787343828318445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-11475440118696848672012-07-01T02:02:30.584-04:002012-07-01T02:02:30.584-04:00Mark - "The Constitution does not "grant...Mark - "The Constitution does not "grant" us any rights, but merely enumerates our rights granted to us by God, such as Life, Liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and of property."<br /><br />Whoa, dude. I don't know how to break this to you, but there is no Great American Sky Daddy bestowing rights on people.<br /><br />The Constitution is a piece of parchment covered in ink written by men. It's not a Golden Tablet inscribed by The Finger of God.<br /><br />The Constitution does indeed"grant" you your rights. If you don't think so, go to a country like Egypt that doesn't have a Constitution and ask them what rights they have. God given or otherwise.<br /><br />"My money is my property..." LOL! No it's not. Money isn't "property". Money is a social construct of of our financial structure. It's a way of keeping score. It's a bunch of binary bits that get transferred back and forth between your employer, Quick Trips and banks.<br /><br />A creditor with a claim against you can get a court order to garnishee your wages and take your money before it ever becomes "your money".<br /><br />You clearly have no idea what money is or how the modern economy works.<br /><br />So just stop.Xavier Onassishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01345787343828318445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-53313259897776134932012-07-01T01:27:23.177-04:002012-07-01T01:27:23.177-04:00To elaborate further, because you don't seem t...To elaborate further, because you don't seem to understand the simplest of concepts--<br /><br />My money is my property. I have a right to own property, and no one. not you, and not the government, has the right to take it from me without my permission or under penalty of law. <br /><br />As I said. <br /><br />Now, for the third time, show me where the Constitution gives Government the right to take my property.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15633208787250567256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-52035277209456599192012-07-01T01:23:01.952-04:002012-07-01T01:23:01.952-04:00XO, I said nothing about disobeying laws.
I did ...XO, I said nothing about disobeying laws. <br /><br />I did say, I <b>SHOULD</b> have the right to refuse insurance. I didn't say the law allows me to refuse. I abide by the law in this case, but I don't have to like or agree with it.<br /><br />The Constitution does not "grant" us any rights, but merely enumerates our rights granted to us by God, such as Life, Liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and of property. <br /><br />The right of liberty would cover your right to be stupid, which you continue to exercise freely, and the right of property implies no one but myself can determine for me how I spend my money.<br /><br />No one. Especially the Government.<br /><br />And by the way, I don't have to be astute. I can read, and I have, unlike you, common sense.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15633208787250567256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-51532177375316013342012-07-01T00:51:23.438-04:002012-07-01T00:51:23.438-04:00Mark - "But, plenty of trying to change the s...Mark - "But, plenty of trying to change the subject. Just like Libs."<br /><br />Not trying to change the subject at all. Just trying to get you to back up your ridiculous assertions with some actual facts.<br /><br />Do you know what facts are? Do you know how to back up what you say?<br /><br />"Constitutionally, I should have the right to refuse to have it. In other words, we all have the right to be unwise..."<br /><br />Really. Being such an astute constitutional scholar, I'm sure you will be eager to point out where in the Constitution it grants you the right to disobey laws and be "unwise".<br /><br />Go for it.<br /><br />Waiting.Xavier Onassishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01345787343828318445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-12314480788374405022012-07-01T00:12:46.069-04:002012-07-01T00:12:46.069-04:00Still no one has shown me where in the Constitutio...Still no one has shown me where in the Constitution it says Government can force me to pay for anything under penalty of law.<br /><br />But, plenty of trying to change the subject. Just like Libs.<br /><br />I have car insurance and health insurance because it's the wise thing to do, but, Constitutionally, I should have the right to refuse to have it. In other words, we all have the right to be unwise, just like XO and Ducky have the right to be stupid.<br /><br />And damned if they don't exercise that right on a daily basis.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15633208787250567256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-7799961563387152062012-06-30T23:20:53.488-04:002012-06-30T23:20:53.488-04:00My guess is that Mark doesn't know squat about...My guess is that Mark doesn't know squat about the Constitution or about how our legal system actually works. <br /><br />Most "conservatives", especially the ones around here, are like 10 year olds who don't like being told to make their bed and clean their room.<br /><br />They're petulant children who think they know better than the grown ups.<br /><br />I kind of enjoy watching Fox News these days. Their apoplexy amuses me. It's like watching an immature child throw themselves on the floor kicking and screaming.<br /><br />It's so funny that they think that will actually effect reality.Xavier Onassishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01345787343828318445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-38600777733860865302012-06-30T22:34:29.312-04:002012-06-30T22:34:29.312-04:00I don't know XO, my guess is that Mark the Con...I don't know XO, my guess is that Mark the Constitutional Scholar will be filing to overturn Marbury vs. Madison any day now so that he can let his auto insurance lapse.Ducky's herehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14608115001116619877noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-58132869115391372292012-06-30T22:15:43.220-04:002012-06-30T22:15:43.220-04:00Mark, whether you believe you should be compelled ...Mark, whether you believe you should be compelled to buy insurance or not is irrelevant.<br /><br />It's law and i has been law for some time although, as XO says, you are free to petition the court because you feel you should be able to drive irresponsibly.<br /><br />Get in line with those that are going to challenge the latest although Roberts did a nice job of closing the door on them.<br /><br />Man, your boy let you down. Must really frost you.Ducky's herehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14608115001116619877noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-59376821493132743402012-06-30T21:37:39.871-04:002012-06-30T21:37:39.871-04:00Mark - "They were paid a salary with which I ...Mark - "They were paid a salary with which I am sure they paid for their equipment. So they weren't compelled to pay for anything they couldn't afford."<br /><br />Really? I'm not familiar with the details of that arrangement.<br /><br />Please educate us.<br /><br />How much did pay did conscripts and officers receive under the Washington Administration and how much did those GOVERNMENT MANDATED PURCHASES cost? <br /><br />What percentage of the soldier's military pay went to equipping themselves and how much did that leave to reimburse them for their soldiery?<br /><br />Please, I can't wait to examine the numbers. Enlighten us with your insights into the impact of the GOVERNMENT MANDATED PURCHASES of President George Washington on his soldiers.Xavier Onassishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01345787343828318445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-15622315443535247842012-06-30T21:29:35.690-04:002012-06-30T21:29:35.690-04:00Mark - "It is 100% unconstitutional. Go ahead...Mark - "It is 100% unconstitutional. Go ahead, Craig. Show me in the Constitution where it says the government has the right to force us to purchase anything. Go ahead."<br /><br />If you TRULY believe that, put your convictions where your mouth is, refuse to buy insurance and take it to court. Fight it all the way up to the Supreme Court.<br /><br />Because whether you like it or not, it's the Supreme Court who gets to decide what is an isn't Constitutional. Not you, Mark-the Constitutional-Scholar, but the Supreme Court.<br /><br />That's the way the Founding Father's established the process in the Constitution that you pretend to be so familiar with.Xavier Onassishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01345787343828318445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-15243786162231405942012-06-30T18:48:45.616-04:002012-06-30T18:48:45.616-04:00"Do you drive a car Mark? I hope you have ins..."<i>Do you drive a car Mark? I hope you have insurance, it's mandatory.</i>"<br /><br />I was hoping some Lib would bring this up. Yes I do drive and yes I do have car insurance, but no, I don't believe even State government should compel me to buy car insurance under penalty of law.<br /><br />It is 100% unconstitutional. Go ahead, Craig. Show me in the Constitution where it says the government has the right to force us to purchase anything. Go ahead.<br /><br />While I think car insurance is a darn good idea and everyone should have it, I believe we American citizens have the right to refuse to buy insurance without having to suffer a penalty.<br /><br />As far as the founding fathers and their rules for militiamen:<br /><br />They were paid a salary with which I am sure they paid for their equipment. So they weren't compelled to pay for anything they couldn't afford. like health insurance will be especially under Obama's rules and regulations.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15633208787250567256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-89157527873021975152012-06-30T18:00:28.828-04:002012-06-30T18:00:28.828-04:00No Government has any right to force anyone to buy...<i>No Government has any right to force anyone to buy anything under penalty of law. Period.</i><br /><br />Do you drive a car Mark? I hope you have insurance, it's mandatory.<br /><br />WWFFD? (what would the founding fathers do?).<br /><br />The <a href="http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Large/Volume_1/2nd_Congress/1st_Session/Chapter_33" rel="nofollow">Uniform Militia Acts</a>, passed by Congress May 8, 1792 and signed by George Washington.<br /><br />By law, <b>each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective states, resident therein, who is or shall be of the age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years ...shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia</b> They weren't big on standing armies back then.<br /><br />Here's where they force them to buy (obtain) something under penalty of law,<br /><br /><b>every citizen so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, <i>provide himself</i> with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges,</b><br /><br />Officers were forced too, <b>The commissioned officers to <i>furnish themselves</i> with good horses of at least fourteen hands and an half high, and to be armed with a sword and pair of pistols, the holsters of which to be covered with bearskin caps.</b><br /><br />This was GW, father of our country, and a Congress that included 20 framers forcing white guys to buy all that stuff.<br /><br />Why do you hate George Washington and why do you hate America? Maybe you just don't know enough about America.Craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06124629994153584904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-91764829981071694612012-06-30T12:15:08.050-04:002012-06-30T12:15:08.050-04:00Joe, the bottom line is this:
No Government has ...Joe, the bottom line is this:<br /><br /> No Government has any right to force anyone to buy anything under penalty of law. Period.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15633208787250567256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-57081345765842023622012-06-29T12:05:16.981-04:002012-06-29T12:05:16.981-04:00Joe gets health insurance from a system with less ...Joe gets health insurance from a system with less than 5% overhead.<br /><br />He'd rather be with a system that hits him with 25 - 30% vigorish and maybe denies his claim in the process.<br /><br />Plus the additional staff needed to deal with billing at hospitals and medical offices. They could probably be better used to deliver care but Joe likes plenty of overhead when it comes to his health care.<br /><br />Go figure.<br /><br />Remember Joe, Craig, XO and myself work hard to help you live the life of the mind.Ducky's herehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14608115001116619877noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-66775896439971151562012-06-29T11:54:05.890-04:002012-06-29T11:54:05.890-04:00Well, it's a first step. It would have been a ...Well, it's a first step. It would have been a real blow to drop back to square one and give up the minimum progress this law represents.<br /><br />Don't worry, Joe. We won't forget you. Progressives will continue to work for basic standards foe all. <br /><br />Keep an eye on Vermont --- New England, tip of the spear.Ducky's herehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14608115001116619877noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7632224842501413538.post-11211600776775985032012-06-29T11:32:41.100-04:002012-06-29T11:32:41.100-04:00Candidate Obama, SEIU health forum 2007
If the Ho...Candidate Obama, SEIU health forum 2007<br /><br />If the House passes the Senate healthcare bill tomorrow, it will be seen merely as a stepping stone to further reforms, including the public option, which has always been and always will be part of achieving universal healthcare, i.e., total federal takeover of the American healthcare system, fully 1/6th of the the U.S. economy.<br /><br /><br /><br />The term "Socialized Medicine" is used to describe a system of publicly administered national health care. TeaBagger https://www.blogger.com/profile/16132071136150322635noreply@blogger.com