Cugalabanza

According to Politico, Kimmell "has the better grasp of health policy" http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/20/jimmy-kimmel-bill-cassidy-obamacare-repeal-242932

Fine. I understand what you're implying, but I was not being ironic.

1. Ewww 2. Honestly, there are some good arguments for being anti-immigrant. I can see the validity. I can appreciate the concerns about security, about jobs, about cultural identity, etc... I happen to be pretty liberal on this issue and I tend to be tolerant of immigrants (including illegals)--there are good arguments for that side as well. I won't get into it here, but it's a topic that has a lot of room for good debate. I find it disappointing that often, instead of debate, this issue gets hot very quickly and tends to be partisan with stale, entrenched talking points from both sided. 3. Sure, all the time. A few examples: a) My doctor thinks I should eat better & drink less. b) Mrs. Banza advises against me spending money on a new guitar. c) Some other TBD members have said it's stupid to post in PPP, but I still do sometimes.

Jesus Christ man, what is your deal?

No, that's not it. There are people with positions different from mine that I respect. I'm surprised to see such a hot response to me saying I value independent thinking. It's not a "marker of status" (I don't know where that comes from). I happen to like talking to people who think for themselves and don't just parrot the statements of some group that they belong to. That's all.

Are you talking about politics or your own posting strategy?

Ok, alright, I jumped to a conclusion a bit. But, am I wrong. Is this new bill actually worth defending? Or is it just the expedient political play for right now, being pushed through as a hot rush, last ditch, under the wire hail mary pass?

Ok, fair enough. I think you're exaggerating the phenomenon, but I'm certainly not going to defend the democratic party. At this point, I can't believe anyone who isn't actually holding political office would maintain loyalty to either party. My naïve hope is that the general reaction over time to the current political chaos will be for people to tend more towards independent thought and somewhat walk away from their pre-packaged group-think ideals. I don't feel very confident about that though.

True, that article does not include details about the actual plan. And I don't have the language of the plan. I'm relying on things I'm reading about it, from multiple sources. There seems to be agreement that this plan (like the other recent versions) will reduce the amount of people covered by millions and it disproportionally targets low income families and people with pre-existing conditions. I apologize for not doing thorough research, providing links, etc... My intent was to open up for discussion. I'm curious if anyone is willing to defend this plan on merit. Is it significantly different than other proposals that have been made? I understand that this plan aims to convert funding to states via grants and that's a new twist. Other than that, is there any reason to consider this as a real option for real people and anything other than a political play to nominally honor the "repeal Obamacare" promise that conservatives expect to be honored?

No, I didn't say that. The fact that he's critical of players from both teams is merely evidence that he's not grinding an ideological axe. I thought that was clear.

Go Bannon yourself.

Is he right or is he wrong? Also, it's worth noting that Kimmell was critical of Hillary Clinton too, rightly so... http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/7/jimmy-kimmel-clintons-book-reading-about-titanic-w/

I like Jimmy. But, whether you like him or not, he's right on this point.

I applaud Kimmell for this. It's a dick move from Cassidy. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jimmy-kimmel-senator-lied-right-my-face-over-health-care-n802896

Can't we just appreciate the stupidity of a situation without making it all us & them-y? These are some spectacularly hilarious idiots. But most left-leaning people are not nearly this extreme. Just like most conservatives aren't out there pushing conversion therapy.

Wow

Very grateful for the cool head in a hot situation. RIP, sir.

Good: - Buffalo still has an NFL team Bad; - I don't like football anymore

Kirk Cameron says God is sending Irma to us because we're sinners. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2017/09/kirk-cameron-god-sends-hurricanes-make-sinners-repent/

Rush Limbaugh spouting off about spreading fear & manufacturing hype is perfect. It's what he knows. He's a category 5 swirling storm of ***hole.

I think Trump could have beaten Obama because Brawndo's got what plants crave. It's got electrolytes.

A question for someone who may know: How is DACA unconstitutional? Sessions and Trump seem to be pushing this idea, but it seems like bunk to me. I understand the argument that it was an overreaching use of executive privilege. I can even understand that many could be against it as a policy that they don't like. That's not me, but I can understand that argument. What I can't understand is how it can be described as unconstitutional. Is that not just bully politics?

I think you may have misinterpreted grinreaper's post. He was not really arguing the issue--he was merely taking the opportunity to attack you personally.

True. It doesn't make Arpaio anything. I don't actually care what happens to Arpaio. He's an old man. His life's work of being a dick to people is done. It doesn't make Trump a racist either. But it does make him a **** leader.

And it's reasonable for minorities to feel pissed off about this. To a lot of people, this is another grand gesture of !@#$ off you don't matter here.