OCinBuffalo

Personally? It is my opinion that conner is a paid political troll. Or worse, that conner has deluded himself into believing he is. Why on God's green earth they would Media Matters send anybody here? Well, perhaps they start their noobs on the obscure political boards, and see if they can move up? Sort of minor leagues thing? Come on, clearly conner isn't one of their star players.

If I hated you, I wouldn't have taken the time to explain these things to you. I would have just ignored you. There are people I antagonize, justifiably, and because it amuses me, on this board. You are not one of them.

Yes, exactly like that, but not hate so much as acceptance, at long last, of a truism: conner deserves what s/he gets around here, and probably worse.

Your transmutation is nearly complete.

See, I told you. You will be calling him every name in the book sooner or later. Just wait until you explain something that you are intimately familiar with 3 times in a row, and he posts 20 links in response, none of which disprove what you are saying, and some of which prove it. Then we'll see "how you argue", and, "how you think you are always right". But remember, none of us are above this. We are slowly sucking you in. It's just a matter of time until you are one of us, and this is all highly amusing to me.

Can't get past the fact that, unlike you, I don't get my ideas from TV, huh? The bottom line: None of these FDR/LBJ programs were conceived with actuarial data. Like say: what happens in 60 years, when there is a baby boom, followed by a baby bust? In fact, actuaries were only consulted, and added to these programs years later, AFTER people realized what a cluster F was about to happen. LBJ pushed so much crap so fast, there was no way they even looked at any of this stuff: kinda like "we have to pass it, to know what's in it". This is the real problem: these programs weren't designed to adjust over time, and neither is Obamacare. So what? The fact is that Pelosi/Reid said "we HAD to elect them immediately in 2006" because they could "solve" all these problems. The veto was not a new concept. Neither was the fact that this remains a center right country. The fact is, just like with Iraq, they are about gaining power, and then trying to turn is into a European country. We could only speculate back in 2005 that this was their agenda. Now, we KNOW it is, and we absolutely justified in firing them because of it. Want Democrats to be successful? Lose the "progress" of the "progressives". Get the old Democrats to re-take their party back from these leftist tools. Get back to representing the things middle class people care about. Nobody wants to "progress" towards suck, and the Pelosi/Reid/Obama plan = suck, big time. Given the choice between what we have seen since 2006, and nothing. I will take nothing. I want problems to be solved. But I am not for letting these immature, far-left fools be in charge of anything. They have proven that not only can't they be trusted to take a "best idea wins" approach problems, they can't be trusted to define problems properly, or even see them .

I don't know about "crushes", but..."Are you planning a surprise party for us?" was hysterical. The concept that the Obama Bastardization has done anything domestically that "we don't know about" is preposterous.

Hehe Nice call. Does the hypnofrog get an assist on that one? Also, it remains to be seen if the same thing happens in Colorado but with the Republican quitting. The fact that a libertarian? insurgent can command 40% of the vote, in Colorado of all places, without the Republican dropping out, is a clear indicator of the mood of the country right now. This has nothing to do with poor communication, although Obama etc. have proven they suck at that too. Rather this has to do with a "refudiation" of these policies. The poll results speak for themselves.

I am merely telling you the truth, because you desperately need to hear it. Stop pretending that your complaining about me somehow makes you look like you understand this any better. Want something positive? OK, I guarantee you now know more about this bill from this thread than you have learned everywhere else, combined. A) The Republicans are committed to Repeal and Replace. Some of them may think they aren't, but they are. They can't just repeal it now, too many modifications to Medicare have already taken affect. Medicare Advantage will be in near shambles by NOV 2011, so they will have to do something. Never mind the fact that: the entire health care system, not just the health care insurance system, needs reform. It does. It does not need socialism, for socialism's sake. B) It would be stupid for them to do that, especially given the fact that they are going to win based on people hating the leftist radicals currently in charge, and not because they love Republicans. And, anyone who really understands this stuff knows that the standard political positions each side likes to take, simply don't apply here. The whole system is f'ed, and therefore, the whole system needs reform. Obamacare has whole areas that have been ideologically left out, or, are clear political payoffs to the usual suspects. After all the crap Obama/Pelosi/Reid have pulled in the last 4 years...you want the Republicans to be conciliatory? They have every right to stick it to Obama, etc. However, if they are smart, they won't. As I said: this is a hate leftists, not love Republicans election. The Republicans, especially the newly elected ones, have to prove they can do the job, and earn people's trust, just like the 94-2000 crowd did.

FUTILITY! And, normally I would say: The Republicans better not push the leftists too far into a corner, because that always leads to trouble for them(think Clinton Impeachment).... ....but given that old Bill is considered a conservative by these people, they have put Hillary in a box, and these leftists' performance has been just awful, perhaps there's nothing to worry about? Politically: I keep thinking that the White House, and their media flunkies, will bottom out, learn from their mistakes and start getting better. But, what used to be f'ing up badly once a week, has turned to every day, with no end in sight. Most administrations make these mistakes in the first 6 months, but 2 years? Incompetence. Example: Obama says "we have to punish our enemies?" WTF is that? You can bet your ass that is the first campaign slogan for whoever runs against him. The 70% of Americans who support the Arizona immigration law are now "enemies"? WTF? I still can't believe the sheer stupidity, on all levels, of that comment, from a guy who is supposed to be smart.

So what if I told you that I can also identify the good things in detail, just like I can with the bad ones? I can do this all day, but I doubt you will make the effort to understand any of it. Instead, you will keep telling us how we have to work together, both sides, etc., without the first friggin clue as to whether or not that is even feasible. When you get done telling us we should all get along: the fundamental flaws in this bill will still remain, the problems will still remain unsolved, along with the new ones this bill creates. They cannot be walked back or "amended" away, even if we forced Congress to sit in a drum circle, sing kumbaya and smoke kind bud for 6 months. These flaws are inherent to the the bill, and they are the direct result of the Democrats letting ideology, and not sound problem solving methodology, rule them. Instead of starting with defining the problems correctly, they started with the solution they wanted, and worked backwards towards the problem. I've seen clients do this plenty, and it's FAIL. Like I said, there are good things, but ALL of them are on the periphery. The root cause of many problems is the core of the bill itself, leaving the only RATIONAL choice: start over.

In any case, prepare yourselves for the crying and the emotional anecdotes about "(insert 30ish woman here, with 2nd grader) who is now suffering because Republicans cut (insert program here)". Oh and don't forget about the "school teachers and fireman" that will all be out of a job, since their jobs aren't "shovel ready".

Yes, we should negotiate with these people. Perhaps if we bow to them a little more, and show more respect for their point of view, they won't be completely psychotic douchebags.

Ah, gay jokes. I will remember this if you ever start whining about gay marriage, and how insensitive everybody is. I have no idea how far Darin has gotten in life, but more importantly, we can add this to the massive list of things you don't know. No, as I said, I have literally read EVERYTHNG that I deemed worthy of my time, and that is an ongoing process. And, more importantly, I have created an entire methodology and enterprise system, from scratch, to specifically deal with the huge chunks of health care business process that the turdish health care software companies have completely ignored. I just happened to be reviewing that CMS stuff when you decided to start running your mouth. I have 20+ more examples of why the Federal government's incompetence makes it near impossible for them to administrate Obama care as designed. Want me to drop one on you every day for a month? 1. But how, and how do you propose to do that while keeping the "deficit neutral" lie intact? This is the #1 thing I have been posting since the health care debate has started. So, we agree, but you don't know how to do this, and I do. 2. Again how? I know how. It's a simple, logical progression that even you should be able to understand: a. You RATIONALLY, not macro swings(Democrats blindly throwing $$ at the problem and Republicans blindly cutting), cannot cut cost if you cannot manage it. b. You cannot manage cost if you cannot measure it. c. You cannot measure cost by reliance on health care workers sitting at desktops....and that's where we come in. As I said: we know how to solve these problems, and we are. A little patience though, please: as I far as I can tell, we are the ONLY way that Obamacare has a hope of getting done. So, you WANT me right where I am, bailing out Democrats from EPIC FAIL. 3a. Then you hate Obamacare, because it has ALWAYS been about driving people to the "public option". They took that part out, but that was a smokescreen. The whole point of Obamacare is to drive people to the governmemnt exchanges, which are easily aggregated into...the single payer system that far-left wanted from the get-go. 3b. The point of the fine is to make it blatantly obvious to employers that they are better off dropping their employees' health insurance, which means they move to the government exchange...oh what a coincidence! :rollyseyes: If you want these changes made, then you are 100% for REPEAL, never mind replace. You are confused. 4. Well, when you realize that this is an abuse of the commerce clause, and, will probably cause the SCOTUS to finally define solid limits for that clause, which will mean that the Feds will lose the threat of power, which means Dems are going to get screwed across the board, now and forever, having once again gotten the exact opposite of what they intend...I will will laugh, and you will blame Bush. Yes. But the difference is: my positions and views are based on practical experience, years of intensive intellectual labors, tons of reading and a commitment to staying in field doing some project work every day your positions are based on...what exactly? As far as being right? I get PAID to be right about these issues. Anybody paying you for your "knowledge" of this issue?

1. You worked the Cleveland Steamer into a thread, without much of a stretch. Hysterical. 2. Thanks for the Alabama Hotpocket thing, the urban dictionary always makes me howl, and that page is lulz. Alabama Hotpocket. Really? Yuck. Now I have to live with that the rest of my life.

I was trying to go for the "Social Security and Norman Rockwell, 2 things that are quaint, but are useless to me." in my sig, but I can't seem to get the words together. It's been frustrating me for months.

I was going to thank you for explaining a complicated issue in such a concise way, but I didn't get to it. However, if you are going to call us all dumb(typical liberal) then forget it. Oh, and: is there a way to boil this down, not in a cliched way, but in a way that makes sense and means something? In a way that we could ask a question to politician without it taking 10 minutes? Saying "no funding future SSI liabilities" is sort of dorky and nobody knows what you mean.

No. Stop wasting my time, because you don't know anything. Did you read that PDF? No? Then you will continue to know nothing. Hahhahaha I have 10x the chance of fixing many of these problems right where I am. In fact, you want me and my outfit right where we are, you just don't know it yet. What we are doing MAY end up helping Democrats not look like complete fools on this issue. It MAY even provide a vehicle for both parties to get out of the gutter and work together, because finally they will have accurate cost data that hasn't been extrapolated(poorly) based on financial allocation(retarded). But, since you don't have any idea what I just said, and won't bother to learn it, I suppose I shouldn't have included that part. Maybe Alaska_Darin is right, and I should just call you an idiot? Edit: Oh, and we're still waiting for you to describe exactly what you would amend. Here's your opportunity to prove you aren't an idiot.

No. I have had these positions ever since my last Grateful Dead show, at Soldier Field in Chicago, and back when I thought teabagging was getting kicked in the balls. I woke up one day, walked around the parking lot, saw unregulated capitalism, egregious profits being made, no taxes being charged, no payroll taxes being paid, unsafe products being sold, and it hit me: "these bastards are absolute hypocrites!". No "liberal" has been allowed to spew their economic/corporationsbad fairy tales around me ever since. I am sure things like gays in the military is important to gays in the military, but it's not urgent for the rest of us. I don't believe in allowing special interests, especially those that affect less than 1% of this country's population, to become more important than getting results with the economy, which affects us all. Same with all the rest of the social issues. We need to focus on first things, first. But go ahead and keep telling yourself that most people care about your pissant agenda. Let's meet back here on Nov. 3rd and we can see who is right, and who is part of a 20% "majority".

I don't know...apparently he went after erectile dysfunction ads as being inappropriate... ...so I am pretty sure he doesn't like our offensive line.

Haha, I completely forgot about that Association of Assclowns. If they are the same people you see in an average coffe "spot" it's little wonder that they went nowhere.

Last time I checked holding a man to his word had nothing to do with being a *ussy. I'm just not sure whose word we are talking about here, Obama's or the media's. And I don't care to be labeled a right-winger, when I don't have anything in common with them except I am done with big government. I don't care about: 1. gays in the military 2. gays in general 3. abortion 4. school prayer - I prayed plenty in school, mostly that my boner would go away before the bell rang. 5. prayer in general - its supposed to be personal after all, so why are we talking about it publicly? 6. secularism running amok - as long as none of it gets on me 7. (insert contentious social issue here) I think all drugs should be legalized immediately, I think women deserve equal pay for equal work, I think labor unions are a good idea(for now, but they are pushing it), I think we need a strong military, because we do, and I think we need comprehensive immigration reform, and if the only way to do that is some amnesty, it's worth the price of fixing the system. Yeah, I'm a real right winger alright! But ultimately, I don't care about any of these things if it means the economy is going to be screwed up by d-bag liberals, who actually aren't liberals in the true sense of the word, but socialists who can't seem to learn from history, or what the f is happening in Europe right f'ing now.

Or was it a "media" promise? I had a difficult time differentiating between Obama making promises, and the MSM making promises for him, during the campaign. Anyway, the concept that Obama would unite us is now officially dead: link here OK usual suspects on this board: How in the hell do you expect the Republicans NOT to completely oppose Obama on every single issue when he says stuff like this? This is the end of your "whaaaa, Republicans won't support Obama on anything, whaaaa, Republicans won't put forward any ideas, whaaaaa" crying. Every time you post that garbage from here on out, expect me to post this link, and laugh at you. This is politically idiotic. It's as if he is purposely trying to lose. And don't tell me about "firing up the base". "The base" consists of 20% of the electorate. Is he trying to pull a Mondale(lose 49 states in 2012)? Does he think any of this helps the Democrats who are trying to hang onto their seats? If not, then what possible purpose does this serve? Apparently, as I said before, the Democrats are only getting money from the absolute wingnuts, so now Obama is speaking wingnut.

Thanks for that image. It's hard to believe, but he deserves every bit of it. Look, I used to feel like you do. Your apprehension to the repeated public humiliation of another human being is a perfectly natural first response. But in time you will get over it, trust me.

Also, go here if you would like HHS to extol the "wonders"...of things other industries have been taking for granted for the last 20 years. Holy crap! There's this new-fangled thing called integrated systems!!! God forbid they ever learn about web services. Fundamentally, health care sucks at computers because they have been served by the modified, not even JV, team consultants. EDIT: The heatlh care regulators, from the HHS secretary all the way down to the surveyors, have no clue about quality assurance, and all they have succeeded in doing is allowing rampant fraud, while needlessly harassing the good providers. None of them have ever run a serious feasibility study, like we did, to determine the best way for health care workers to collect VALID raw data, because none of them even know what that term means. Meanwhile, the government wants to spend billions on these people.