Countdown until Obama is gone

[itsmeJonB]

I hear those who cant do teach

 

[Accountable]

Ah so if you don't agree with the message then you disparage the messenger eh??

You wanna disrespect me I can take it and I deserve it.

Accountable has been nothing but decent IMO and did not deserve this from you.

And if you take some of his comments made elsewhere regarding problems with kids you would probably find he has more wisdom about dealing with kids than most.

I guess Acc some people have a different vision of what the constitution is about.

Thanks, Allen. :thumbup

DA, I'll have to answer you a bit later. I'm busy now but will come back probably in the morning.

 

[Accountable]

Yes you're being consistently inconsistent. A few weeks back your posts were more logical and you were the type to agree to disagree but now you have a ripping peoples heads off post style. I just thought that with school starting you might be under a lot of added pressure and stress that has made you well what is the word I'm looking for? Ummm a disappointment....

Perhaps the change was of subject, or maybe I changed my responses to fit the tone addressed to me. Maybe your own mood is different. You accuse me of being inconsistent, then say I never do things, after having said I used to do them .... I'm leaning toward your mood as being the culprit.

For example...You never answer questions.

Completely untrue.

Like when Francis showed you that you were wrong about his pointing out the fact about Countries all being different in Government.. You never answered back and just rambled on..

When you make accusations, it helps if you show what, if anything, you base them on. Link, please.

You never answer Minor straight with an answer but rather skirt the answer and say, It's in the Constitution, but never say what in the constitution or explain why the Constitution would be the law.

You have a nasty habit of using emphatic statements when even you would acknowledge they are inaccurate to the point of lying.
It's funny that you accuse me of incompetence (the third-grade history jab) but don't know that the US Constitution is the very foundation of our law. It's kinda like failing to explain why water would be wet. You also don't point out any historical inaccuracies I may have made anywhere in your post. Odd.

To address your coming to Minor's rescue, you seem to have the same reading deficiencies as he. I answer questions I wish to answer, and ignore comments, accusations, and opinions with question marks on the end (His habit of presumptuously telling me my thoughts, opinions and motives irritates me). I constantly and regularly quote our Constitution, normally supplying a link to the full text as well.

And Health Care....

If that is the case, as an example on health care, why is the law on health care still standing....Why is it that only Accountable, can see it's unconstitutional but the rest of the country and Superior Count has not put a stop to it... Why is Medicare /Medicaid still alive after all these years ?

First, Medicaid is not a federal program and doesn't apply here.
Second, I am not alone in calling the new set of laws unconstitutional, but don't let that alter your preconceptions.
Third, I posted this as part of another conversation in another forum, but it applies here:
The question asked there was similar to yours about "Why don't the courts just throw it out if it's unconstitutional?"

That is the system that was put in place. It seems that not one gives it a second thought now. The Senate is supposed to block unconstitutional legislation proposed by the House of Representatives, and vice versa. The President is supposed to veto any unconstitutional legislation that crosses his desk. None of that is happening. The Supreme Court will review a law and assess its constitutionality, but only if someone has the money and time to take it through the gauntlet of the appeals process. Now I'm hearing that a citizen can't simply challenge the constitutionality of a law, but must establish that he has been personally harmed by said law - otherwise he does not have standing. Since it's the Constitution itself (and thus the nation's legal system) that is harmed, and the 500 or so people in Washington who are sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution are both the perpetrators and the people with standing, We the People are pretty well screwed. The last time this happened was when FDR and his majority party stacked the Supreme Court, then passed social legislation the Constitution never delegated to the federal government.

And lastly....

When Francis tries to explain how much he knows about the US you treat him like a Stupid Little Canadian...

You asked the question and I'm just giving you an outsiders view...

Your tiresome characterizations don't mean anything to anyone but you. Do you have a link to show what you're talking about? While you're searching that out, I'd appreciate if you'd check out the context as well, because ignoring context is probably the reason you're getting your panties in a knot.

 

[edgray]

I typed out this little gem in a different forum today:

The Party is bought and paid for. It has two franchises so that nobody can accuse it of monopoly. It uses it's power and influence to block any challengers from getting a foothold in our political market. It can do this because it's employees write the legislation. While they do have a retail market, the American voter, their real bread and butter is in wholesale, dealing with large corporations. They give the dollars The Party needs to operate their retail operations, in exchange for favorable legislation. The party uses this money for advertising blitzes that smaller parties and even rich individuals can't hope to compete against.

The Republican franchise of The Party have usurped the TEA Party brand. It's not the idealistic micro it was a few months ago. It a subsidiary now.

What you quaintly refer to as "throwing their asses out at the ballot box" is no more than returning a defective part to the retailer and picking up another one - from the same retailer. Hopefully this one will work, eh? Ever thought about bypassing Home Depot and shopping at Earl's hardware? Nah, nobody shops there; HD has everything you need.

Simply voting for another establishment politician (employee of The Party) because you believe he might be different from the last employee of The Party seems a bit foolish to me. The very fact that they are willing to associate themselves with The Party should logically mark them for suspicion.

There are other parties other than The Party. There are other people willing to do the job that don't fit The Party's mold. Until The Party perceives a genuine threat to it's retail operations, meaning something outside the two franchises, they will continue business as usual.

Good answer.

Both parties are bought and paid for by large corporate and banking interests. The differences are minimal. But the chances of electing anyone outside the party are minuscule until everyone turns off their damned TVs.

 

[MoonOwl]

Good answer.

Both parties are bought and paid for by large corporate and banking interests. The differences are minimal. But the chances of electing anyone outside the party are minuscule until everyone turns off their damned TVs.

PS has said this many times. Only when they cancel cable will people pay attention. hehehehehehehehehe...... or outlaw beer or somethin'....24:

We get the bs we deserve for being a bunch of UsefulIdiots who can't see through the bs we are fed to what's really happening...

Hey, Happy Labor Day from this slave to the rest of you slaves :cool

 

[edgray]

PS has said this many times. Only when they cancel cable will people pay attention. hehehehehehehehehe...... or outlaw beer or somethin'....24:

We get the bs we deserve for being a bunch of UsefulIdiots who can't see through the bs we are fed to what's really happening...

Hey, Happy Labor Day from this slave to the rest of you slaves :cool

I think outlawing beer and cable TV is a good starting point...

 

[AUFred]

Bush's second term and Obama's first term are too similar. Big difference is the government seems to be growing exponentially with a willing party to rubber stamp whatever spending plan comes to mind. I do not believe the government can spend us out of this mess.

 

[edgray]

Bush's second term and Obama's first term are too similar. Big difference is the government seems to be growing exponentially with a willing party to rubber stamp whatever spending plan comes to mind. I do not believe the government can spend us out of this mess.

perhaps it's time to rework our idea of government and it's purpose. And also our economies and why we have no say in how they're managed.

 

[darkangel]

Hi Accountable. I'm glad I didn't take the bet cuz after reading your post I think I would have lost it. I only wonder how late you stayed up last night writing that! And yet still nothing to back up your words. Very disappointing and the reason I didn't take the bet...:nod:

And just when I still had a little faith in you to come up with some direct answers.. Just a few Things I will touch on. And I'm not going to tear you post apart and make it into confetti. I just woke up and I don't want to embarrass you...

Medicaid is the United States health program for eligible individuals and families with low incomes and resources. It is a means tested program that is jointly funded by the state and federal governments,

As the Baby Boomer generation begins to reach nursing home age in 2020 to 2040, the nursing home aspect of Medicaid will boom, causing concerns for federal and state budgets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicaid

Medicaid is available only to certain low-income individuals and families who fit into an eligibility group that is recognized by federal and state law. Medicaid does not pay money to you; instead, it sends payments directly to your health care providers. Depending on your state's rules, you may also be asked to pay a small part of the cost (co-payment) for some medical services.

Medicaid is a state administered program and each state sets its own guidelines regarding eligibility and services.

Many groups of people are covered by Medicaid. Even within these groups, though, certain requirements must be met. These may include your age, whether you are pregnant, disabled, blind, or aged; your income and resources (like bank accounts, real property, or other items that can be sold for cash); and whether you are a U.S. citizen or a lawfully admitted immigrant. The rules for counting your income and resources vary from state to state and from group to group. There are special rules for those who live in nursing homes and for disabled children living at home.

Your child may be eligible for coverage if he or she is a U.S. citizen or a lawfully admitted immigrant, even if you are not (however, there is a 5-year limit that applies to lawful permanent residents). Eligibility for children is based on the child's status, not the parent's. Also, if someone else's child lives with you, the child may be eligible even if you are not because your income and resources will not count for the child.

http://www.cms.gov/medicaidgeninfo/01_overview.asp

Medicare in the US had good intentions.. But it is very costly.. Bad administration..
Companies often take advantage of Medicare / Medicaid in the US.. The system is very weak...It needs to be changed for everyone concerned...

And lastly this will take you only a few minutes to watch unlike eds 2 hour video. I suggest that you watch it and learn a thing or two from 60 Minutes. I'm sure that everyone will find it interesting...

http://www.provokingthought.net/videos/eefb11120180/

Your tiresome characterizations don't mean anything to anyone but you. Do you have a link to show what you're talking about? While you're searching that out, I'd appreciate if you'd check out the context as well, because ignoring context is probably the reason you're getting your panties in a knot.

I have just provided you with 2 links for your reading enjoyment and a Link to 60 Minutes so that you can have a better understanding of our system and know what I and other Americans along with sone Canadians are talking about. And my panties are't in a knot. At least not that I know of. I'll have to check on them seeing as I'm not wearing any and they are in the laundry basket.

Happy Labor Day Accountable!

 

[Guyzerr]

Bush's second term and Obama's first term are too similar. Big difference is the government seems to be growing exponentially with a willing party to rubber stamp whatever spending plan comes to mind. I do not believe the government can spend us out of this mess.

Um.... Obama hasn't started a war yet. Just thought I would point that out.

 

[itsmeJonB]

Obama rant in a nutshell:

How dare Obama not clean up Bush's mess within the first year of his term, any idiot can fix it!


Can you fix it?

 

[edgray]

obama rant in a nutshell:

How dare obama not clean up bush's mess within the first year of his term, any idiot can fix it!

Can you fix it?

:24: :24: :24:

 

[Guyzerr]

Obama rant in a nutshell:

How dare Obama not clean up Bush's mess within the first year of his term, any idiot can fix it!


Can you fix it?

Ouch... That's gunna hurt all those Bush fans. :clap

 

[Guyzerr]

Obama rant in a nutshell:

How dare Obama not clean up Bush's mess within the first year of his term, any idiot can fix it!


Can you fix it?

I also posted this in post # 20 and it's been conveniently overlooked by the Bushites.

I'm glad you made that point to which............

Regardless of who was elected the numerous problems left by the previous administration are too much for ANY President to resolve in one term. You guy's are in a full blown depression and if it wasn't for the cash injected by your government there wouldn't be a soup line long enough for you to get in. Unfortunately your country is dragging the rest of the world down as well. It's also unfortunate the entire world's economy is governed by the actions of one country run by a select few of very rich corporations / people.

 

[AUFred]

Um.... Obama hasn't started a war yet. Just thought I would point that out.

No he hasn't on foreign soil. The rift he is creating here is not good pitting the rich against the poor.

 

[Francis]

Bush's second term and Obama's first term are too similar. Big difference is the government seems to be growing exponentially with a willing party to rubber stamp whatever spending plan comes to mind. I do not believe the government can spend us out of this mess.

Didn't you spend you way into this mess to start with ?

Sub-Prime and all...

 

[Guyzerr]

No he hasn't on foreign soil. The rift he is creating here is not good pitting the rich against the poor.

See post # 20

 

[darkangel]

I'm glad you made that point to which............

Regardless of who was elected the numerous problems left by the previous administration are too much for ANY President to resolve in one term. You guy's are in a full blown depression and if it wasn't for the cash injected by your government there wouldn't be a soup line long enough for you to get in. Unfortunately your country is dragging the rest of the world down as well. It's also unfortunate the entire world's economy is governed by the actions of one country run by a select few of very rich corporations / people.

It was overlooked because they don't have a legit way to contradict this. This post just proves my point that even Canadians know more about the US situation and how it can be resolved than a lot of Americans. Like I said we're going to see some good things in Obamas 2nd Term..And he will be re-elected.

 

[AUFred]

Didn't you spend you way into this mess to start with ?

Sub-Prime and all...

I think bailouts hurt as much as anything, Poor banking practices by lenders at the insistence of the government fueled the situation.

 

[Francis]

I think bailouts hurt as much as anything, Poor banking practices by lenders at the insistence of the government fueled the situation.

True but bailouts hurt with their domino effect and can cause even more damage.. I have seen bailouts that have been good for companies and communities that had good track records and never needed help before and again..

I think bailouts just for the sake of votes are bad..

But a bailout for the good of truly well founded company that has just hit a hard patch is not a bad investment..

Poor banking practices should never be encouraged.. They often lead to many financial issues of all types..