Tea Party fields a pro-witchcraft candidate

[GodfatherofSoul]

Awaiting explanation...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nECxQUi_pr0

[SteelerEmpire]

Well, she's good news for people that support Witchcraft...

[GBMelBlount]

Well, she's good news for people that support Witchcraft...

I also think she's good news for a large percentage of liberals who prefer an excuse to vote liberal as a vote against a republican candidate on a single issue, as opposed to justifying their vote based on general liberal principles.

[smokin3000gt]

That's ok. I'll take someone who dabbled in witchcraft versus someone dabbles in raping The Constitution.

[SteelerEmpire]

I just want to know if she was the good witch, or the bad witch ? The witch of the east, or witch of the west... north or south ? That makes a difference you know...

[GodfatherofSoul]

That's ok. I'll take someone who dabbled in witchcraft versus someone dabbles in raping The Constitution.

In other words, you really don't care who or what is running under a Tea Party banner just as long as the jingoism is right? The same people who rant and rave about Muslims building rec centers with prayer rooms and propagate the myth the President is a Muslim, now don't have a problem with a woman who "dabbled in witchraft" and Satanism?

[st33lersguy]

Nice for the far left to dig up dirt on anyone they disagree with just to try to destroy them. Same people who ignored Obama hanging out with communists like Jeramiah Wright and Bill Ayers. Besides she probably only dabbled in it a long time ago.

[smokin3000gt]

I'm not in Delaware so it's easy to stir the pot. I'm more concerned about her anti-masturbatory beliefs. Besides, she 'dabbled' in it, where as pelosi is 110% bruja.

http://nicedeb.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/nancy_pelosi.jpg



On a more serious note, there's going to be jingosm on both sides. Even if she did believe in witch craft (in what, JR high?? :wtf: ), as long as she's not a proponent of bigger government, smaller private sector, taxing small businesses into oblivion, steal from the rich and give to the poor mentality (see also: handout) I don't see how she could be much worse then the 'Christian' politicians on Capital Hill now.

[LLT]

Ugh...are people really this blind.


I "dabbled" in high school football....It doesnt make me a NFL Pro.

I "dabbled" in high school track.....It doesnt make me an Olympic Sprinter.

I "dabbled" in high school drinking...It doesnt make me an alcoholic.

How the hell does a high school curiosity in the occult override 25 years of her Christian beliefs???? Another example of hypocritical intolerance by "the party of inclusion"

[Akagi]

IMO, it isn't important that she "dabbled in witchcraft". What IS important is that I don't believe it. I think she made it up. It just isn't plausible... first date, blood, altar, etc? COME ON. Even if the guy was a warlock, or whatever they call themselves, would he REALLY take a girl to a coven/religious ceremony on the first date?

I call bull.

[SteelerEmpire]

IMO, it isn't important that she "dabbled in witchcraft". What IS important is that I don't believe it. I think she made it up. It just isn't plausible... first date, blood, altar, etc? COME ON. Even if the guy was a warlock, or whatever they call themselves, would he REALLY take a girl to a coven/religious ceremony on the first date?

I call bull.

If not her, I wonder who then did they sacrifice ? lol...

[GBMelBlount]

I just want to know if she was the good witch, or the bad witch ? The witch of the east, or witch of the west... north or south ? That makes a difference you know...

Which witch? Perhaps both if she alters at the altar. :scratchchin:

[LLT]

IMO, it isn't important that she "dabbled in witchcraft". What IS important is that I don't believe it. I think she made it up. It just isn't plausible... first date, blood, altar, etc? COME ON. Even if the guy was a warlock, or whatever they call themselves, would he REALLY take a girl to a coven/religious ceremony on the first date?

I call bull.


Enter Bill Maher, who promises to show a video of O’Donnell every week until she comes on his show “Real Time.”
http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2010/09/19/christine-odonnell-says-she-dabbled-in-witchcraft-in-1999-video/

I call... desperate attempt for ratings.

[GodfatherofSoul]

Witchcraft? Satanism? Big deal! I LOVE her politics! Now, those Muslims...now THAT is something I have a problem with!

lol you guys keep on rationalizing. You know, you should consider what happens if you get these nutjobs actual positions of power. Being a legislator is a lot harder than reading talking points no matter how low your opinion of Congress might be.

[GodfatherofSoul]

I'm not in Delaware so it's easy to stir the pot. I'm more concerned about her anti-masturbatory beliefs. Besides, she 'dabbled' in it, where as pelosi is 110% bruja.

http://nicedeb.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/nancy_pelosi.jpg



On a more serious note, there's going to be jingosm on both sides. Even if she did believe in witch craft (in what, JR high?? :wtf: ), as long as she's not a proponent of bigger government, smaller private sector, taxing small businesses into oblivion, steal from the rich and give to the poor mentality (see also: handout) I don't see how she could be much worse then the 'Christian' politicians on Capital Hill now.

"On a serious note" following a photoshopped picture of Nancy Pelosi. Seriously?

[smokin3000gt]

"On a serious note" following a photoshopped picture of Nancy Pelosi. Seriously?

Seriously.


edit: I can see the photoshop now. I thought she did look a bit more 'dolled up' then usual..

[LLT]

Witchcraft? Satanism? Big deal! I LOVE her politics! Now, those Muslims...now THAT is something I have a problem with!

lol you guys keep on rationalizing. You know, you should consider what happens if you get these nutjobs actual positions of power. Being a legislator is a lot harder than reading talking points no matter how low your opinion of Congress might be.

Rationalizing would be...trying to broad paintbrush a candidate based on something she did in high school, and by doing that... legitimizing a blackmailing attention whore.

The very title of this thread is a lie.

Is she now pro-witchcraft? No? Then how is the tea party movement backing a pro-witchcraft candidate? Would you say that Bill Clinton or the current president ARE drug users because they tried pot in college?

I guess in some way...you could "rationalize" such hypocrisy.

[GodfatherofSoul]

Blackmailing attention whore? Who, Bill Maher? The guy has an bombshell of a story with a candidate for national office talking about dabbling in witchcraft and Satanism. You expected that to be kept in a drawer somewhere?

[LLT]

Blackmailing attention whore? Who, Bill Maher? The guy has an bombshell of a story with a candidate for national office talking about dabbling in witchcraft and Satanism. You expected that to be kept in a drawer somewhere?


Blackmail is the act of threatening to reveal substantially true information about a person to the public, a family member, or associates unless a demand is met. This information is usually of an embarrassing, socially damaging, and/or incriminating nature. As the information is substantially true, the act of revealing the information may not be criminal in its own right nor amount to a civil law defamation; it is the making of demands in exchange for withholding the information that is often considered a crime

Does it meet the definition? (and your "rationalizing" by the way)

2nd point.... you never answered the question.


Would you be willing to label Bill Clinton and Barak Obama as present tense drug abusers?

[GodfatherofSoul]

Does it meet the definition? (and your "rationalizing" by the way)

2nd point.... you never answered the question.


Would you be willing to label Bill Clinton and Barak Obama as present tense drug abusers?

My title was intended to be satirical. And, Clinton was using cocaine during his Presidency anyway if you believe his brother (I think he got busted in a sting stating he was buying coke for his brother).

Are you seriously asking for blackmail charges against Bill Maher? He's a comedian being a comedian! What bothers you more; Bill Maher the blackmailer or O'Donnell dabbling in witchcraft and Satanism?

[LLT]

My title was intended to be satirical.

Some would call it misleading...or an "untruth"


And, Clinton was using cocaine during his Presidency anyway if you believe his brother (I think he got busted in a sting stating he was buying coke for his brother).

I'm not willing to deal with assumptions.


Are you seriously asking for blackmail charges against Bill Maher?

Did I say he should be up on charges? Just pointing out what type of character ..or rather LACK of character Bill Maher has. I could care less that he broke the story...but he became a self-serving blackmailer by insisting on her coming onto his show (to boost his poor ratings) at the threat of "releasing damaging tape"


He's a comedian being a comedian!

Really?...I prefer my comedians to be...funny....not slimy.



What bothers you more; Bill Maher the blackmailer or O'Donnell dabbling in witchcraft and Satanism?

I would hope that any grown person would prefer a person who dabbled in the occult as a teen but has come to her senses as an adult over a greasy talk show host who is currently doing something unethical and self serving.

[The Patriot]

Christine O'Donnell dabbled in whichcraft

:rofl2::rofl2::rofl2:


Ugh...are people really this blind.


I "dabbled" in high school football....It doesnt make me a NFL Pro.

I "dabbled" in high school track.....It doesnt make me an Olympic Sprinter.

I "dabbled" in high school drinking...It doesnt make me an alcoholic.

How the hell does a high school curiosity in the occult override 25 years of her Christian beliefs???? Another example of hypocritical intolerance by "the party of inclusion"

Yeah, and Ted Haggard "dabbled" with a male prostitute, but he is totally 100% not gay at all. :toofunny:

[7SteelGal43]

ok, seriously, since when does "i dabbled in withcraft" equal "pro witchcraft" ? C'mon leftnutz, is this the best you got ? :toofunny:

[GodfatherofSoul]

It should have been obvious from the video, this thread, and current news coverage that she's not promoting witchcraft (e.g. satire). You pointed to a criminal definition of blackmail. What am I to assume from that? There's blackmail and there's Blackmail. Blackmail attempts don't happen on the air. The fact that you know about it tells you it's not real Blackmail. Had he made the offer behind the scenes and attempted to conceal the transaction, then you could argue blackmail. This was a joke that the audience (including me) thought was funny.

I still can't believe that you guys are blowing off that she admits to dabbling in witchcraft and satanism. You can argue that it happened when she was younger, but was anyone you hung out with dabbling in witchcraft and satanism in high school?

[LLT]

:rofl2::rofl2::rofl2:



Yeah, and Ted Haggard "dabbled" with a male prostitute, but he is totally 100% not gay at all. :toofunny:

Oh boy....I shouldnt have to explain this, (especially since this thread seems to be more about diversion)

Haggard was guilty...CURRENTLY guilty of the behavior in question.

O'Donnell's behavior was in high school....and she has since grown up and matured past such experimentation. To blame her for what she did as an immature teenager sets you up for having to use the same rule on the current president and his drug use.

Anything less..is hypocrisy

[JonM229]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

That is all

[LLT]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

That is all

You are now officially funnier then Bill Maher.

[st33lersguy]

It is worth noting that her opponent is an avowed Marxist

[The Patriot]

Oh boy....I shouldnt have to explain this, (especially since this thread seems to be more about diversion)

Haggard was guilty...CURRENTLY guilty of the behavior in question.

O'Donnell's behavior was in high school....and she has since grown up and matured past such experimentation. To blame her for what she did as an immature teenager sets you up for having to use the same rule on the current president and his drug use.

Anything less..is hypocrisy

Nope! Sorry, I'm afraid we're gonna have to burn her at the stake. It's the only way to save her soul. :chuckle:

Alright fire it up, boys!

[LLT]

Nope! Sorry, I'm afraid we're gonna have to burn her at the stake. It's the only way to save her soul. :chuckle:

Alright fire it up, boys!

...and now Bill Maher is #3.

[The Patriot]

One of my first summer jobs was as a christmas elf.

[LLT]

One of my first summer jobs was as a christmas elf.

Cool...actually possible if you lived in Australia.

[SteelerEmpire]

A Witch in the United States Senate ?? The "Book of Revelations" said there'd be days like this ...

[LLT]

A Witch in the United States Senate ?? The "Book of Revelations" said there'd be days like this ...

I thought it was "mama" who said that there would be days like this?

[The Patriot]

Cool...actually possible if you lived in Australia.

Maybe she can cast a spell and eliminate the national debt!

[LLT]

Maybe she can cast a spell and eliminate the national debt!

Voodoo economics?

[The Patriot]

Voodoo economics?

oh not bad.

[LLT]

oh not bad.

Thank you...thank you! :humble:

[smokin3000gt]

Witchcraft? Satanism? Big deal! I LOVE her politics! Now, those Muslims...now THAT is something I have a problem with!

lol you guys keep on rationalizing. You know, you should consider what happens if you get these nutjobs actual positions of power. Being a legislator is a lot harder than reading talking points no matter how low your opinion of Congress might be.

Isn't that the truth? Those who don't believe it can take a good look at our PRESIDENT!

[HometownGal]

Well - there's already a loud mouthed bitch who is Speaker of the House and a racist witch in the White House, so what's the big deal? :noidea:



http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4YFhK87NXPE/SN-22S6izvI/AAAAAAAAByk/r4dN3fuCmpk/s400/MichelleWitch.png

[Mach1]

I had completely forgotten about this, but was reminded by Dick Morris on Hannity’s show this evening.

Hillary clinton holds seance

While serving as First Lady in the White House, Hillary Clinton claims to have had conversations with the ghost of Eleanor Roosevelt about the problems and responsibilities of being First Lady.

According to Hillary at the time, it was a two-way conversation.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/sep/07092405.html:crazy:

[Wallace108]

Witchy women are hot. :thumbsup:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggj_puxFBvg

And Christine O'Donnell is definitely a witchy woman. :lust:

http://libertypundits.net/images/upload/Christine_ODonnell.jpg

[zulater]

Everyone should know by now that the statute of limitations only applies to liberals and Democrats. To wit we've currently or recently had leading Democrats who were in the KKK, (Byrd) commited manslaughter, ( Ted Kennedy) closely associated themselves with known terrorists ( Obama with Ayers) all well after high school.

It's way more revealing that a Tea Party member as a high school girl dabbled in witchcraft. We all know that what we dabbled in in HS is way more relevant than what we have done as adults.:sarcasm:

[smokin3000gt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVzJ2RIlUwE

[The Patriot]

Everyone should know by now that the statute of limitations only applies to liberals and Democrats. To wit we've currently or recently had leading Democrats who were in the KKK, (Byrd) commited manslaughter, ( Ted Kennedy) closely associated themselves with known terrorists ( Obama with Ayers) all well after high school.

It's way more revealing that a Tea Party member as a high school girl dabbled in witchcraft. We all know that what we dabbled in in HS is way more relevant than what we have done as adults.:sarcasm:

I think you guys are missing the point. We liberals aren't questioning her character because she played witch in high school, we're questioning her character because she's a grown woman who believes she was actually a witch in high school. :chuckle:

I mean, if I came on this forum and told you I was a werewolf in high school, would you question my sanity? :dizzy:

[GodfatherofSoul]

Everyone should know by now that the statute of limitations only applies to liberals and Democrats. To wit we've currently or recently had leading Democrats who were in the KKK, (Byrd) commited manslaughter, ( Ted Kennedy) closely associated themselves with known terrorists ( Obama with Ayers) all well after high school.

It's way more revealing that a Tea Party member as a high school girl dabbled in witchcraft. We all know that what we dabbled in in HS is way more relevant than what we have done as adults.:sarcasm:

What makes you think Byrd or Kennedy was forgiven? Kennedy still has a lot of enemies. Carter was on the news last week slamming Kennedy for holding up his health reform bill back in the 70s.

And, by your "closely associated with terrorists" comment what about all of the modern day figures "closely associated" with Oliver North, Richard Nixon, G. Gordon Liddy, Marvin Bush, Prescott Bush, the Keating 5, blah, blah blah?

[GodfatherofSoul]

Whoops, is O'Reilly a "blackmailing attention whore" too?


http://videos.mediaite.com/embed/player/container/420/421/?layout=&playlist_cid=&media_type=video&content=P21DZL2TC0PWTJMJ&widget_type_cid=svp&referrer=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/21/oreilly-christine-odonnel_n_732849.html#


It just seems to me...I don't know, Juan, I'm trying to be fair to Ms. O'Donnell. She's been on this program a couple of times, and we have some kind of crazy stuff that she said. We're not going to play it yet. I don't think it's relevant yet. We'd still like Ms. O'Donnell to come on the Factor. I'm not in the business of [injuring] her. I'd like to see if she's the better candidate.

[LLT]

I mean, if I came on this forum and told you I was a werewolf in high school, would you question my sanity? :dizzy:

You could tell me that you were a drug using hippie werewolf transexual .....and I would still think that being a patriot fan would be the sticking point for your insanity.

[HometownGal]

I mean, if I came on this forum and told you I was a werewolf in high school, would you question my sanity? :dizzy:

You aren't still a werewolf? :doh: ;)


http://images.quizfarm.com/1104789107werewolf.jpg

[X-Terminator]

Witchcraft? Satanism? Big deal! I LOVE her politics! Now, those Muslims...now THAT is something I have a problem with!

Last time I checked, witches haven't killed millions of people throughout their history simply because they aren't witches.

Really, who cares if she dabbled in witchcraft in high school? I actually knew a practicing witch while I was in college who was part of my inner circle of friends - great person, lots of fun. It's freaking irrelevant to the job O'Donnell may or may not do if she gets elected to Congress. And I just love how so many people take such a holier-than-thou attitude, as if they don't have skeletons in their closets that they wouldn't want people to know.

[GodfatherofSoul]

Last time I checked, witches haven't killed millions of people throughout their history simply because they aren't witches.

Really, who cares if she dabbled in witchcraft in high school? I actually knew a practicing witch while I was in college who was part of my inner circle of friends - great person, lots of fun. It's freaking irrelevant to the job O'Donnell may or may not do if she gets elected to Congress. And I just love how so many people take such a holier-than-thou attitude, as if they don't have skeletons in their closets that they wouldn't want people to know.

What about the Satanic altar stuff? Was that just good old teen fun too?

[X-Terminator]

What about the Satanic altar stuff? Was that just good old teen fun too?

That stuff is just...weird and creepy. Shouldn't exclude her from being able to run for Congress.

Seriously, if we're going to start persecuting people for things they did when they were KIDS, then we'd have very few people left who'd be able to or would even want to run for public office.

[Craic]

This is downright hilarious. The political group that screams out for respect of all religions (except Christianity of course), is now ripping apart a person for investigating a set of religious beliefs in highschool.

:doh:

[Craic]

Last time I checked, witches haven't killed millions of people throughout their history simply because they aren't witches.

Really, who cares if she dabbled in witchcraft in high school? I actually knew a practicing witch while I was in college who was part of my inner circle of friends - great person, lots of fun. It's freaking irrelevant to the job O'Donnell may or may not do if she gets elected to Congress. And I just love how so many people take such a holier-than-thou attitude, as if they don't have skeletons in their closets that they wouldn't want people to know.

Not to mention, it is illegal to make anyone take a religious litmus test for office. Kinda funny how the liberal side of the spectrum want to ignore that as well.

[GodfatherofSoul]

That stuff is just...weird and creepy. Shouldn't exclude her from being able to run for Congress.

Seriously, if we're going to start persecuting people for things they did when they were KIDS, then we'd have very few people left who'd be able to or would even want to run for public office.

That's my point. It's weird and creepy. She can for President for all I care, but I'm trying to point out the hypocrisy of stomping feet and railing against the entire Muslim faith for an Imam building a rec center too close to Ground Zero, for chastising the President for being a Muslim based on nothing more than his father's faith, then turning around and shrugging your shoulders when a Conservative states she dabbled in witchcraft and Satanism. What's a bigger enemy to Christianity than Satanism?

[X-Terminator]

That's my point. It's weird and creepy. She can for President for all I care, but I'm trying to point out the hypocrisy of stomping feet and railing against the entire Muslim faith for an Imam building a rec center too close to Ground Zero, for chastising the President for being a Muslim based on nothing more than his father's faith, then turning around and shrugging your shoulders when a Conservative states she dabbled in witchcraft and Satanism. What's a bigger enemy to Christianity than Satanism?

Well hey, you know what? You can call me whatever you want, but I am against building a mosque that close to Ground Zero and I fully admit that I do not trust Muslims. It's a little tough for me to trust someone who wants to see me dead simply because I'm not a Muslim/Islamic.

[zulater]

What makes you think Byrd or Kennedy was forgiven? Kennedy still has a lot of enemies. Carter was on the news last week slamming Kennedy for holding up his health reform bill back in the 70s.

The point is no Republican or conservative could get elected with that kind of baggage to begin with. The mainstream press routinely runs interference for their liberal breathren. I mean if this woman were a Democrat the press would be blowing this story off completely.

And, by your "closely associated with terrorists" comment what about all of the modern day figures "closely associated" with Oliver North, Richard Nixon, G. Gordon Liddy, Marvin Bush, Prescott Bush, the Keating 5, blah, blah blah?

Poor comparison. :bs: None of those people were associating with anyone that your rank and file Dems weren't also associating with at the time.

[GodfatherofSoul]

Well hey, you know what? You can call me whatever you want, but I am against building a mosque that close to Ground Zero and I fully admit that I do not trust Muslims. It's a little tough for me to trust someone who wants to see me dead simply because I'm not a Muslim/Islamic.

You have no appreciation for how huge the Muslim faith is. We're at war with a relatively tiny sect of Saudi-flavored Muslims. This might be a bad analogy, but not trusting Muslims would be like not trusting Christians because of IRA terrorists.

[Mach1]

That's my point. It's weird and creepy. She can for President for all I care, but I'm trying to point out the hypocrisy of stomping feet and railing against the entire Muslim faith for an Imam building a rec center too close to Ground Zero, for chastising the President for being a Muslim based on nothing more than his father's faith, then turning around and shrugging your shoulders when a Conservative states she dabbled in witchcraft and Satanism. What's a bigger enemy to Christianity than Satanism?

Don't forget Obaaama dabbled in "blow", didn't exclude him from running for senate or president.

[Craic]

You have no appreciation for how huge the Muslim faith is. We're at war with a relatively tiny sect of Saudi-flavored Muslims. This might be a bad analogy, but not trusting Muslims would be like not trusting Christians because of IRA terrorists.

I get what you are talking about here. I too have tried to differentiate between the two. However, I think your comparision (and to be fair, you have already stated as much) is not accurate.

A more appropriate comparison would be to compare all Christians to say, the IRA, the KKK, the Christian Identity movement, Hitler's state church, and the Christians in Bosnia/Chechnya etc. and Nigeria. Because in reality, there are a whole lot more Muslim subsets that while they don't act out against the US, they never shed a tear for American lives lost. It is STILL a minority, and a small minority at that. But it is viable enough to cause a lot of problems, and to cast doubt on the actions of most Muslims--as it makes it difficult to discern between them.

[X-Terminator]

You have no appreciation for how huge the Muslim faith is. We're at war with a relatively tiny sect of Saudi-flavored Muslims. This might be a bad analogy, but not trusting Muslims would be like not trusting Christians because of IRA terrorists.

Yeah, well I guess I don't.

When I start seeing more than a "nod and wink" from the so-called "moderate Muslims," then maybe I'll change my mind. And I'm not talking about a couple here and there, I'm talking about a widespread denouncing of the extremists, both here and abroad. Until then, I don't trust them. Simple as that. If that makes me a bigot, then so be it.

[GBMelBlount]

I still can't believe that you guys are blowing off that she admits to dabbling in witchcraft and satanism. You can argue that it happened when she was younger, but was anyone you hung out with dabbling in witchcraft and satanism in high school?

So what concerns YOU more Godfather, a conservative that "dabbled" (if that) in witchcraft in high school, or her opponent who has self admittedly dabbled in socialism?

[JonM229]

I bet she's no fan of Ernest Borgnine:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEhKZNQlJrY

[SteelerEmpire]

If a bank, apartment complex, employer, etc... does a credit check OR background check... THEY WILL HOLD IT AGAINST YOU... weather or not your that same person at the current time is of no concern to them... I'm just sayin...
Should we let our politicians (the very same people that made those laws for institutions to evaluate a person according to their back-ground) to have a set of different standards ??

[smokin3000gt]

If a bank, apartment complex, employer, etc... does a credit check OR background check... THEY WILL HOLD IT AGAINST YOU... weather or not your that same person at the current time is of no concern to them... I'm just sayin...
Should we let our politicians (the very same people that made those laws for institutions to evaluate a person according to their back-ground) to have a set of different standards ??

So do you know any witch dabblers that have been denied a job or rental? :boink:

[GBMelBlount]

If a bank, apartment complex, employer, etc... does a credit check OR background check... THEY WILL HOLD IT AGAINST YOU... weather or not your that same person at the current time is of no concern to them... I'm just sayin...
Should we let our politicians (the very same people that made those laws for institutions to evaluate a person according to their back-ground) to have a set of different standards ??

Of course not, but why is the her dabbling a bigger deal than her opponents affection for socialism?

Is the fact that her opponent is a self admitted socialist empathizer not a bigger concern to you?

I agree with your point but you are focusing on a flea when there is an elephant in the room friend.

What concerns YOU more Steelempire?

[GodfatherofSoul]

Most people don't know WTF "socialist" even means besides the fact that it's a word in USSR. There's a lot of socialism in our government that you LOVE, but you don't know it. Every modern nation has socialist elements and HAS to to function at the size a modern nation is.

[GBMelBlount]

There's a lot of socialism in our government that you LOVE, but you don't know it.

So do you feel the socialism is working well in our country Godfather?

You know, the concept of taking by force what belongs to one group and giving it to those to whom it does not belong so that the elitist politicians can better spend OUR money in order to socially engineer a utopian society...

If an individual does this it is a crime.

...and since we are debating government imposed solutions over free markets, I would love to hear your take on the trillion dollar stimulus bill being passed to create short term jobs at a million dollars per job versus a tax break for a trillion directly to the job creators.

[SteelerEmpire]

Of course not, but why is the her dabbling a bigger deal than her opponents affection for socialism?

Is the fact that her opponent is a self admitted socialist empathizer not a bigger concern to you?

I agree with your point but you are focusing on a flea when there is an elephant in the room friend.

What concerns YOU more Steelempire?

Its all about who the person is today , not what they were in the past. Let the person explain "what happened" first if you must go back into their past. If we took a person's record at its absolute value then, for Christians, Jesus was a felon that received the death penalty... if we did not know the story that led up to that event, he'd be just another thug. There are "many" such stories like that that even relates to people we know. Its not about what a person did in the past, but what they are now. From Obama's Rev. Wright drama and his Muslim father, to O'Donnell and her witchcraft... they both should have a say in what "really" happened and who they are now.
In addition. People get "born again" all the time. I would much have a former criminal (and again, most of Jesus's disciples were former criminals) that's born again than a worldly, money grubbing person doing something that would affect me in anyway.
How can we know who a person is now ? Good question. Maybe some form of a psychological examination ? An investigation into a persons past that only goes back 3-4 yrs ? Certainly theres something better than the current mid-evil style methods we are currently using...

[The Patriot]

Most people don't know WTF "socialist" even means besides the fact that it's a word in USSR. There's a lot of socialism in our government that you LOVE, but you don't know it. Every modern nation has socialist elements and HAS to to function at the size a modern nation is.

Damn the fire department! It put all those private fire brigades out of business for good!

[X-Terminator]

Damn the fire department! It put all those private fire brigades out of business for good!

Don't think anyone has ever complained about the fire department, or police department or transportation/road construction being funded. Those are essential services that the government should provide for. When you start getting into the government mandating or taking things by force, such as the progressive tax system that punishes success, confiscating private property, forcing people to buy health care insurance under the threat of prison time, taking over businesses (Government Motors, anyone), having a "pay czar" to tell people (mainly those "evil rich") how much they can make, among others and all for the so-called "public good," then yeah, I'd call that socialist.

[The Patriot]

Don't think anyone has ever complained about the fire department, or police department or transportation/road construction being funded. Those are essential services that the government should provide for. When you start getting into the government mandating or taking things by force, such as the progressive tax system that punishes success, confiscating private property, forcing people to buy health care insurance under the threat of prison time, taking over businesses (Government Motors, anyone), having a "pay czar" to tell people (mainly those "evil rich") how much they can make, among others and all for the so-called "public good," then yeah, I'd call that socialist.

Well, yeah. I agree that there is a line, but we're just pointing out that on the political scale a lot of people disagree where the line should be drawn. For instance, a lot of people like socialized medicine for the elderly and veterans but not for the entire country. A lot of people think forcing people to pay for health insurance is going too far, but is that different from forcing people to pay for their children's education?

[LLT]

If a bank, apartment complex, employer, etc... does a credit check OR background check... THEY WILL HOLD IT AGAINST YOU... weather or not your that same person at the current time is of no concern to them... I'm just sayin...
Should we let our politicians (the very same people that made those laws for institutions to evaluate a person according to their back-ground) to have a set of different standards ??

Are you really comparing a persons financial history with their high school actions?

You do realize how that arguement is full of holes...right?

[GodfatherofSoul]

Don't think anyone has ever complained about the fire department, or police department or transportation/road construction being funded. Those are essential services that the government should provide for. When you start getting into the government mandating or taking things by force, such as the progressive tax system that punishes success, confiscating private property, forcing people to buy health care insurance under the threat of prison time, taking over businesses (Government Motors, anyone), having a "pay czar" to tell people (mainly those "evil rich") how much they can make, among others and all for the so-called "public good," then yeah, I'd call that socialist.

But, those programs that we all like and expect are socialist! If you're going around whining about "socialism" or calling any US politician a socialist (when in reality we *all* are to some extent), it's impossible to have an honest debate because you don't understand what the word means. And, I wish people would stop saying we "took over" GM. We gave them a massive bailout that seems to be working. The President isn't sitting on the board picking out interior swatches.

[X-Terminator]

But, those programs that we all like and expect are socialist! If you're going around whining about "socialism" or calling any US politician a socialist (when in reality we *all* are to some extent), it's impossible to have an honest debate because you don't understand what the word means. And, I wish people would stop saying we "took over" GM. We gave them a massive bailout that seems to be working. The President isn't sitting on the board picking out interior swatches.

The U.S. Government is the largest shareholder in General Motors. So yeah, that means they "own" them. Weren't they also the ones who fired the former CEO right after they "bailed them out" and hand-picked the current CEO?

I know damn well what the definition of "socialist" is. Socialism yields more and more power to the state, and takes it out of the hands of the people. The health care bill is a prime example of that. We have, in essence, given almost complete control over 1/6th of the U.S. economy to the feds. They are the ones who will now be setting the rules of the game. And apparently, you're just fine with that. I'm not.

Sorry, but the government is too bloated and wasteful as it is. Time to start trimming the fat and force the government to start operating within a budget, just like the rest of America. We simply cannot afford it anymore.

[SteelerEmpire]

Are you really comparing a persons financial history with their high school actions?

You do realize how that arguement is full of holes...right?

"No Way" would I have got a hundred feet of "witchcraft" or anything on that same level in HS. I went to the service as soon as I turned 17 cause I was interested in serving my country... The point I'm trying to make is someone does know the difference between right and wrong at that age...
But if your going to go by a person's background... you should be consistent... I don't agree with financial history checks and background checks "to an extent" regardless.
I think the biggest question is whether or not her "witch meetings" consisted of Harry Potter like, childs play... or were they killing and sacrificing animals...

[X-Terminator]

Well, yeah. I agree that there is a line, but we're just pointing out that on the political scale a lot of people disagree where the line should be drawn. For instance, a lot of people like socialized medicine for the elderly and veterans but not for the entire country. A lot of people think forcing people to pay for health insurance is going too far, but is that different from forcing people to pay for their children's education?

No it's not. It's also not different from requiring people to have car insurance before they can drive a car. On its surface, I don't really have a problem with mandating that people carry health insurance. I believe everyone should have access to affordable health insurance. I just disagree on how it should be done and I certainly disagree on the punishment for choosing not to purchase insurance. That is the main difference between Obamacare and requiring people to pay for their kids' education or buying car or homeowner's insurance.

[zulater]

"No Way" would I have got a hundred feet of "witchcraft" or anything on that same level in HS. I went to the service as soon as I turned 17 cause I was interested in serving my country... The point I'm trying to make is someone does know the difference between right and wrong at that age...
But if your going to go by a person's background... you should be consistent... I don't agree with financial history checks and background checks "to an extent" regardless.
I think the biggest question is whether or not her "witch meetings" consisted of Harry Potter like, childs play... or were they killing and sacrificing animals...

Teenage girls are a breed apart. They do all sorts of goofy things that are 180 degrees different than what their personality was when they were younger or what it will be when their older. Providing they don't commit crimes against others in this stage i think you should pretty much ignore it.

[LLT]

"No Way" would I have got a hundred feet of "witchcraft" or anything on that same level in HS. I went to the service as soon as I turned 17 cause I was interested in serving my country... The point I'm trying to make is someone knows the difference between right and wrong... even in HS....

Right...but you are not legally liable for financial decisions at the age of 14-17 (your parents are)...because the law demands for parents to accept liability until young people reach an age of accountability.

Municipailties...states..and the federal law recognizes that young people make bad decisions and protect them to an extent. How can you compare her actions in regards to the original post..to that which actually RECOGNIZES and protects young people and their bad decision making!!!???

[SteelerEmpire]

Wonder how old was she when it went down ? But anyway. Bill Maurer said,"he's gonna keep throwing out bodies (about O'Donnell) every week until she agrees to come onto his show". Friday (tomorrow) will be the next one according to him... this stuff is gettin good... lol...

[GodfatherofSoul]

Wonder how old was she when it went down ? But anyway. Bill Maurer said,"he's gonna keep throwing out bodies (about O'Donnell) every week until she agrees to come onto his show". Friday (tomorrow) will be the next one according to him... this stuff is gettin good... lol...

Bill O'Reilly said the same thing to get her to come on the Factor. What?

[GodfatherofSoul]

The U.S. Government is the largest shareholder in General Motors. So yeah, that means they "own" them. Weren't they also the ones who fired the former CEO right after they "bailed them out" and hand-picked the current CEO?

I know damn well what the definition of "socialist" is. Socialism yields more and more power to the state, and takes it out of the hands of the people. The health care bill is a prime example of that. We have, in essence, given almost complete control over 1/6th of the U.S. economy to the feds. They are the ones who will now be setting the rules of the game. And apparently, you're just fine with that. I'm not.

Sorry, but the government is too bloated and wasteful as it is. Time to start trimming the fat and force the government to start operating within a budget, just like the rest of America. We simply cannot afford it anymore.

uh no. Socialism is a collective effort by the people where everyone sacrifices for a greater communal good; i.e. the Commons. We all pay taxes for firemen so I don't have to worry about my neighbor having private fire coverage and setting the whole street on fire (we tried this experiment once and it FAILED). The "state" is the People.

The Fed didn't get control of 1/6 of the economy (it should worry you that we have to pay that much to health insurers). That's a silly hyperbolic statement. They've just slapped more regulations on health insurers. And, the reason they did it which you seem to have forgotten is that over the last 15 years when the health insurance industry promised to change their ways (remember Clinton's attempt at health reform?), they just kept doing the same old thing and jacking up rates while their profits continued to skyrocket. And, that's the fundamental flaw with privatized health care. They continue to jack up rates and cut coverage. It's not in their interest to make you healthy, just to keep you paying each month. I wish we had a federal single-payer health care system where the government ran it because it would be better and cheaper like in all the other Western nations.

But, the numbers don't matter to you because you're convinced that "government is stupid, private industry is smart." Reality isn't that simple.

[GBMelBlount]

And, the reason they did it which you seem to have forgotten is that over the last 15 years when the health insurance industry promised to change their ways (remember Clinton's attempt at health reform?)...

But, the numbers don't matter to you because you're convinced that "government is stupid, private industry is smart." Reality isn't that simple.

Actually it is pretty simple and the numbers do matter.

Isn't it it funny that when the government fails to properly regulate an industry their reward is greater control of it...

Speaking of numbers my daughter goes to a private school and her tuition is 1/4 of that of a public school up the road and their test scores are two grades higher than the public schools on average.

Do these numbers matter to you or are you convinced that an inefficient, overpriced, monopolistic, deficit spending government is somehow a better solution to delivering goods and services than evil greedy capitalists?

[GodfatherofSoul]

Actually it is pretty simple and the numbers do matter.

Isn't it it funny that when the government fails to properly regulate an industry their reward is greater control of it...

Speaking of numbers my daughter goes to a private school and her tuition is 1/4 of that of a public school up the road and their test scores are two grades higher than the public schools on average.

Do these numbers matter to you or are you convinced that an inefficient, overpriced, monopolistic, deficit spending government is somehow a better solution to delivering goods and services than evil greedy capitalists?

Yes, when an industry takes advantage of a lack of regulations the government steps in to protect its citizens. The horror of it all.

Are you trying to say that your kid's private school is 1/4 cost per student? I don't know anything about the demographics of your area, so I have no clue what that means. Public schools have to work with every kid even the bad apples. They don't get to kick you out if you don't perform to keep up the numbers.

[GBMelBlount]

GodfatherofSoul Yes, when an industry takes advantage of a lack of regulations the government steps in to protect its citizens. The horror of it all.


Protect it's citizens?

Friend, are you implying that those who govern us are any less greedy, self serving and corrupt than those they are ostensibly protecting us from?

I think you will agree that would be a difficult argument to win.



Godfatherofsoul

Are you trying to say that your kid's private school is 1/4 cost per student? I don't know anything about the demographics of your area, so I have no clue what that means. Public schools have to work with every kid even the bad apples. They don't get to kick you out if you don't perform to keep up the numbers.

Yes, that was the primary point I wanted to get your thoughts on...that my daughters education costs as little as 1/4 of that of some public schools in our area.

I am pointing out that monopolies, like this usually create a poorer quality product and are much more expensive.....that government products and services are usually way overpriced due to lack of competition.

Surely you can understand this negative aspects of removing competition and forcing the tuition to be paid as opposed to having to compete for it.

[X-Terminator]

uh no. Socialism is a collective effort by the people where everyone sacrifices for a greater communal good; i.e. the Commons. We all pay taxes for firemen so I don't have to worry about my neighbor having private fire coverage and setting the whole street on fire (we tried this experiment once and it FAILED). The "state" is the People.

The Fed didn't get control of 1/6 of the economy (it should worry you that we have to pay that much to health insurers). That's a silly hyperbolic statement. They've just slapped more regulations on health insurers. And, the reason they did it which you seem to have forgotten is that over the last 15 years when the health insurance industry promised to change their ways (remember Clinton's attempt at health reform?), they just kept doing the same old thing and jacking up rates while their profits continued to skyrocket. And, that's the fundamental flaw with privatized health care. They continue to jack up rates and cut coverage. It's not in their interest to make you healthy, just to keep you paying each month. I wish we had a federal single-payer health care system where the government ran it because it would be better and cheaper like in all the other Western nations.

But, the numbers don't matter to you because you're convinced that "government is stupid, private industry is smart." Reality isn't that simple.

Private industry is not always smart, nor do they always do the right thing. If they did, we'd have no need for government regulations of ANY kind. And yes, government is "stupid," and I wouldn't trust them to run a bake shop, much less a huge government program like Obamacare. We're talking about an entity that has brought us the "$400 hammer" and the multi-million dollar John Murtha Airport that has ONE flight per day. Yeah, I can really trust them to do the right thing. :coffee:

I don't know how many times I need to say that there's no question the health insurance system is broken. I haven't said it in THIS thread until now, but I've said this multiple times. It is absolutely ridiculous that my late mother could not get a supplemental Medicare plan simply because of her pre-existing conditions (ESRD). That is one thing about the bill that I DO agree with - nobody gets denied because of a pre-existing condition. Rates are definitely too high in relation to the amount of overall coverage that you get. I get all that. Where I disagree is the way it should be fixed. I still think allowing insurance companies to sell their policies across state lines with strict guidelines that they must follow in each state along with some of the consumer protections that are in Obamacare is the better way. That would work better than these so-called "exchanges" that IMO aren't going to do a thing to lower premium costs if they're limited only to the states where they do business. Not only that, the government gets to decide how much an insurer can increase their rates. Sounds good on the surface, but what happens if the company keeps having their increases rejected? And who determines how much of an increase is "excessive?" One of 2 things will happen - either they cut coverage, or they go out of business because they can't meet the needs of their customers.

As for your single-payer system, there's no way in hell I will EVER support a government-run program. Never in a million years. You always talk about how wonderful and cheap these systems are, yet you completely ignore all of the problems that the countries that have such systems are having. Substandard hospitals. Inadequate staff. 6 month waiting lists for surgeries. Limited access to and development of new technologies. The last one is big, because if they're not spending as much on health care as we are in the US, then that also means they don't spend enough on R&D. People are coming HERE for surgeries that they can't get where they live, because it's either too expensive for the government or it's not available. Not to mention the fact that they will have control over your health care decisions and will decide whether you live or die, because protecting the bureaucracy comes first, second and last. Thanks, but no thanks. I've seen enough of all of the above from Medicare and the VA Hospital system.

I'm sure you'll disagree and dispute all of this...fine. My mind isn't going to be changed, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[GodfatherofSoul]

As for your single-payer system, there's no way in hell I will EVER support a government-run program. Never in a million years. You always talk about how wonderful and cheap these systems are, yet you completely ignore all of the problems that the countries that have such systems are having. Substandard hospitals. Inadequate staff. 6 month waiting lists for surgeries. Limited access to and development of new technologies. The last one is big, because if they're not spending as much on health care as we are in the US, then that also means they don't spend enough on R&D. People are coming HERE for surgeries that they can't get where they live, because it's either too expensive for the government or it's not available. Not to mention the fact that they will have control over your health care decisions and will decide whether you live or die, because protecting the bureaucracy comes first, second and last. Thanks, but no thanks. I've seen enough of all of the above from Medicare and the VA Hospital system.

I'm sure you'll disagree and dispute all of this...fine. My mind isn't going to be changed, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

RICH people are coming here for surgeries. The health care debate isn't about our technology, it's about the COST and access. The insurance industry is the problem.

You make it sound like the private health care industry isn't already making cost effectiveness decisions on your family's life. I'd rather have a government bureaucrat making those decisions based on medical advice than a private industry bureaucrat making that decision based on cost effectiveness and profit.

Again, if other health care systems sucked so bad we wouldn't be #37 on the list (about 2 places higher than Cuba).

[X-Terminator]

RICH people are coming here for surgeries. The health care debate isn't about our technology, it's about the COST and access. The insurance industry is the problem.

You make it sound like the private health care industry isn't already making cost effectiveness decisions on your family's life. I'd rather have a government bureaucrat making those decisions based on medical advice than a private industry bureaucrat making that decision based on cost effectiveness and profit.

Again, if other health care systems sucked so bad we wouldn't be #37 on the list (about 2 places higher than Cuba).

Are you really saying that a government bureaucrat wouldn't make a decision based on cost effectiveness and "profit"? Seriously? You are living in fantasy land if you don't think that wouldn't happen. Absolutely NO way in hell I want some government bean-counter making my medical decisions. That should be the decision of my doctor and me. PERIOD.

Yes, cost and access is the problem. Did you bother to read the part where I said that? Again, I AGREE that cost and access to health insurance is the problem. Where I DISAGREE is how it should be administered. You want, in essence, full government control over health care. I don't. That does NOT mean government should not regulate the industry in order to protect consumers - I believe they should. But there should be limits on how much they should regulate, because you still have to allow for the market to flourish. Insurers can't insure if they aren't making any money.

[GodfatherofSoul]

Protect it's citizens?

Friend, are you implying that those who govern us are any less greedy, self serving and corrupt than those they are ostensibly protecting us from?

I think you will agree that would be a difficult argument to win.




Yes, that was the primary point I wanted to get your thoughts on...that my daughters education costs as little as 1/4 of that of some public schools in our area.

I am pointing out that monopolies, like this usually create a poorer quality product and are much more expensive.....that government products and services are usually way overpriced due to lack of competition.

Surely you can understand this negative aspects of removing competition and forcing the tuition to be paid as opposed to having to compete for it.

Am I to assume you're against government regulation? Your comparison doesn't work. We use government to protect our interactions with each other. We keep removing regulations and having major economic disasters based on people exploiting the absence of those laws; e.g. the Savings & Loan debacle, the Dot Com bubble, and the Mortgage crisis. It's well established that if you don't have rules in place, morality isn't going to stop people from screwing each other over. The roles of government and a private companies aren't comparable.

And, I don't have a problem with competition. But, if the private industry was the bestest cheapest solution, we wouldn't have public colleges any more.

[GodfatherofSoul]

Are you really saying that a government bureaucrat wouldn't make a decision based on cost effectiveness and "profit"? Seriously? You are living in fantasy land if you don't think that would happen. Absolutely NO way in hell I want some government bean-counter making my medical decisions. That should be the decision of my doctor and me. PERIOD.

But, you have a private industry bean counter making those same decisions! Unless you're paying for your medical care with cash...

I did make a mistake in saying a government official would be making the decisions. It's obviously your doctor. The problem we've been having is private industry bean counters keep putting the kabash on any medical care they think is too expensive.

And, this debate wouldn't even exist if our private health care industry was doing a decent job and foreign public health care industries weren't doing so much better.

[Vis]

Companies screwing us is the American way....

[X-Terminator]

*sighs* I give up.

Private industry=evil
Government=saints

No sense in arguing any further.

[Vis]

How does an insurance company profit? 2 ways - squeezing providers to accept less and denying benefits. Now tell me what value they add to the system? Profit for doctors makes sense. Profit for drug companies makes sense. Those can encourage innovation. Profit for insurance doesn't help innovation because they use the power to pay less for drugs and doctors lowering the innovation profit and competition would create. And they have a $1 to $1 incentive to screw over the insured.

[GodfatherofSoul]

*sighs* I give up.

Private industry=evil
Government=saints

No sense in arguing any further.

I never said government is flawless and stop demagoguing the issue. I just don't get the idea that we can wipe away regulation and not worry about getting screwed over by private industry. Hell, even car salesmen have regulations they have to follow put in place because they were screwing over car buyers. Remember that the next time you buy a new Ford that's actually NEW and a FORD. Who do you think is in a better position to regulate commerce than the government?

[GBMelBlount]

GodfatherofSoul

Am I to assume you're against government regulation?


Wow. that was weird. We will just pretend you didn't even ask that question.



godfatherofsould

We use government to protect our interactions with each other.


Of course. We agree.


godfatherofsoul

We keep removing regulations and having major economic disasters based on people exploiting the absence of those laws; e.g. the Savings & Loan debacle

Not the absence of laws, there is definitely no absence of laws and regulation as there is an over abundance of laws and regulations...it is simply the absence of PROPER laws and regulations because our legislators are often very ignorant of the industries they regulate.


godfather of soul

The roles of government and a private companies aren't comparable.

EXACTLY, which is why I am sure we both agree it is unfortunate that the government created and regulated fannie mae and freddie mac which was a collossal failure and was at the epicenter of the crisis....and again it wasn't due to lack of regulation in the mortgage industry as for example there were often dozens of pages of government required disclosures at mortgage loan closings.

[urgle burgle]

simple point: regulaiton is needed in industry to protect worker rights and the safety of the consumer. undue overburdening regulation goes overboard and increases costs and availability. a simple idea would be to enforce regulations on the books and then figure out if they work or not. look at the BP oil spill and the mine accident in WV: simple analysis is that regulations were either ignored, poorly defined, or unenforced. so the fix? add more regulations. novel concept would be to enforce what is on the books since it was, at some point, decided that they would fix the problems in those industries. time and time again, it is shown that those regulations were not enforced at all, or well. so how does adding more regulations that have a history of being not enforced or non-enforceable do anything? it doesn't. that is the real disagreement.