Thoughts on Today's Political Landscape

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by transjen

Everyone knows how the GOP hate goverment ran/sponsered health insurence, but notice how many of em has turned down there's and wentout to buy private insurence
But the GOP should bring a camera crew in to Dick Cheney's private room and have him tell the Americian people how bad goverment ran/sponsered health insurence is and how we will all hate it and will miss and be better off with the current private heath insurence ran mess we all get by
Cheney can then go on about how the goverment ran/sponsered healthcare paid all the bills for his heart transplant [a bill must private insurence compnies won't cover] but you won't like it and you'll be happier with buying your own health insurence from a private provider but Cheney will suffer with goverment ran health insurence he gets for free
Jerseygirl Jen

Don't confuse Cheney's healthcare as former VP with the healthcare we would all get under Obamacare. And don't think for a minute that every 71 year old needing a heart transplant would get one under Obamacare.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Don't confuse Cheney's healthcare as former VP with the healthcare we would all get under Obamacare. And don't think for a minute that every 71 year old needing a heart transplant would get one under Obamacare.

Of course, Jen's point about 71-year-olds never implied that all who needed a heart transplant would get one under "Obamacare." She was making a broader point about government-provided healthcare. And you can rest assured TracyCoxx knew that was her point ... but didn't let it get in the way of making his point by falsely implying (yes, IMPLYING) something in her post that wasn't there, and thus falsely attributing it to Jen by inference.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

Of course, Jen's point about 71-year-olds never implied that all who needed a heart transplant would get one under "Obamacare." She was making a broader point about government-provided healthcare.

Sorry, I couldn't find Jen's point about 71-year-olds. Could you post it please?

All I could find is this:

Originally Posted by transjen

But the GOP should bring a camera crew in to Dick Cheney's private room and have him tell the Americian people how bad goverment ran/sponsered health insurence is and how we will all hate it and will miss and be better off with the current private heath insurence ran mess we all get by
Cheney can then go on about how the goverment ran/sponsered healthcare paid all the bills for his heart transplant [a bill must private insurence compnies won't cover] but you won't like it and you'll be happier with buying your own health insurence from a private provider but Cheney will suffer with goverment ran health insurence he gets for free
Jerseygirl Jen

This is where she was saying a GOP camera crew should go into Cheney's private room and tell americans how government ran/sponsored healthcare paid all his bills for his heart transplant. Then she says he'd say "but you won't like it". What's 'it' in this context? Government ran/sponsored health care. Is that the same government ran/sponsored health care she just mentioned? No it's not is it, but she seemed to imply that it was. Next time I think Jen would be better qualified to interpret what she meant. I kind of thought she'd be more than able to understand what I wrote and reply for herself anyway. I guess that's just me though.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Sorry, I couldn't find Jen's point about 71-year-olds. Could you post it please?

It's the point about 71-year-old Cheney. You know exactly what was meant. But why let that get in the way of you shitting on a serious discussion? I imagine you sitting all alone, smugly thinking that you've bested everyone by pointing out that Jen never used the exact phrase "71-year-old," and believing that somehow you have won. But all you've really done is prove to that you are a miserable troll. I've said it before and I say it again. You've only been indulged for some reason I don't understand, but I stand by this characterization and say enough is enough.

Go ahead ... complain to the site owner about the words I just used. My argument will be this. The rule about not "insulting" other members shouldn't apply to someone who insults the entire site, and offers nothing here except provocation.

Read on...

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

All I could find is this:
This is where she was saying a GOP camera crew should go into Cheney's private room and tell americans how government ran/sponsored healthcare paid all his bills for his heart transplant. Then she says he'd say "but you won't like it". What's 'it' in this context? Government ran/sponsored health care. Is that the same government ran/sponsored health care she just mentioned? No it's not is it, but she seemed to imply that it was. Next time I think Jen would be better qualified to interpret what she meant. I kind of thought she'd be more than able to understand what I wrote and reply for herself anyway. I guess that's just me though.

Jen is one of the most highly valued members of this site. I have no doubt that she would be the first one to tell you that perfect writing in English is not her strongest suit. But you use that as a cudgel against her because you disrespect her, and you disrespect her because she has opinions that differ from yours and is not afraid to state them. And that makes you the very embodiment of everything that's wrong with discourse in this country.

You make me want to vomit.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by smc

Jen is one of the most highly valued members of this site. I have no doubt that she would be the first one to tell you that perfect writing in English is not her strongest suit. But you use that as a cudgel against her because you disrespect her, and you disrespect her because she has opinions that differ from yours and is not afraid to state them. And that makes you the very embodiment of everything that's wrong with discourse in this country.

You make me want to vomit.

Do you see what you have done Tracy? Now I'll have to be on the phone all night with the insurance company about treatment for smc's nausea and I don't think private insurance provides transsexual nurses. I'm calling Obama.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Do you see what you have done Tracy? Now I'll have to be on the phone all night with the insurance company about treatment for smc's nausea and I don't think private insurance provides transsexual nurses. I'm calling Obama.

lol if we can get transsexual nurses in private health care will we be good then?

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

It's the point about 71-year-old Cheney. You know exactly what was meant. But why let that get in the way of you shitting on a serious discussion? I imagine you sitting all alone, smugly thinking that you've bested everyone by pointing out that Jen never used the exact phrase "71-year-old," and believing that somehow you have won. But all you've really done is prove to that you are a miserable troll.

LOL not really, but that is interesting that you would say that though since you routinely attack the words I choose or phrases I choose rather than what I'm actually trying to say. That's an interesting window into your world. Thanks for that.

Originally Posted by smc

Go ahead ... complain to the site owner about the words I just used.

Why? What did you say? No, it was more humorous than anything else.

Originally Posted by smc

Jen is one of the most highly valued members of this site. I have no doubt that she would be the first one to tell you that perfect writing in English is not her strongest suit. But you use that as a cudgel against her because you disrespect her, and you disrespect her because she has opinions that differ from yours and is not afraid to state them. And that makes you the very embodiment of everything that's wrong with discourse in this country.

Aside from her spelling, she is quite capable of making herself clear. And I do respect her for that. I think you should too and let her speak her mind.

And btw, I don't disrespect people for having opinions different than me. There were a number of people on this site that had different opinions than I had and we had many fruitful discussions. That is until you took it as your personal mission to respond for every single person that I tried to engage in a discussion with.

Originally Posted by smc

You make me want to vomit.

Do what you must.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

LOL not really, but that is interesting that you would say that though since you routinely attack the words I choose or phrases I choose rather than what I'm actually trying to say. That's an interesting window into your world. Thanks for that.

Why? What did you say? No, it was more humorous than anything else.

Aside from her spelling, she is quite capable of making herself clear. And I do respect her for that. I think you should too and let her speak her mind.

And btw, I don't disrespect people for having opinions different than me. There were a number of people on this site that had different opinions than I had and we had many fruitful discussions. That is until you took it as your personal mission to respond for every single person that I tried to engage in a discussion with.



Do what you must.

Your dissembling really knows no bounds, does it?

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

Your dissembling really knows no bounds, does it?

Dissemble dissemble dissemble... muh ha ha ha!

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

And btw, I don't disrespect people for having opinions different than me. There were a number of people on this site that had different opinions than I had and we had many fruitful discussions. That is until you took it as your personal mission to respond for every single person that I tried to engage in a discussion with.

You bring this up time and again, Tracy Coxx, rather than answering actual challenges to the political points you seek to make, but the fact remains that there are no PRIVATE discussions in threads on this site. It's really quite simple. If you post in a public thread, anyone can address what you have posted. Someone doing so is not, as you write, responding "for" others.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

You bring this up time and again, Tracy Coxx, rather than answering actual challenges to the political points you seek to make, but the fact remains that there are no PRIVATE discussions in threads on this site. It's really quite simple. If you post in a public thread, anyone can address what you have posted. Someone doing so is not, as you write, responding "for" others.

And time and time again you mischaracterize my statements so that you can argue a different point that has nothing to do with what's being said. I never said this is a private discussion, keep out or anything like that. I said you make it your personal mission to respond for every single person I try to engage in a discussion with. Does that mean you can't participate in the discussion too? No. But common courtesy says you would at least let the other person respond without jumping in with your two cents once in a while. But no. Almost EVERY SINGLE TIME. Doing it sometimes, I can see, but i'm literally talking above 95% over the past few years. I'm talking about etiquette, not privacy.