nice AR is it a 223 or a 308 caliber?

 

 

Some insight into the corporatist health "reform" bill:

Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader: A Discussion on Healthcare, Politics and Reform

 

Kucinich got his *** handed to him last night on Stossel. The show was dedicated on how shitty Cleveland is, and touched on topics like how 50% of the population has moved out from how shitty the Gov't runs it. Most businesses have moved out. Man, he was seriously trying to argue that when services are privatized, employees get paid less and the services performed are worse...I just don't understand how people can hold onto this belief. I really don't get it...How can 50% of the population from a city move out?! Can that even be done? Seriously 50%...and then you have the ***** to sit there and say your city is awesome? Even Drew Carey was on talking **** on Cleveland, and he thinks "Cleveland rocks!"

 

Cleveland? But that city's been run by liberals for over 40 years without any conservatives slowing their "progress." Cleveland should be held up as a shining star of liberal, big government policies at work, unions and all.

Edit: How long ago was it that their river caught on fire?

 

Thanks! It's an AR10 with a GAP upper on it (in rem .260, a necked down 308). Honestly, more rifle than what I can shoot!

 

Why is it every time anything political like global warming or health care comes around for discussion someone always has to bring Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh into it?

Thats an honest, serious question.

 

Because I'm not going to watch/listen to Rachael Maddow to bring her into any topic ever.

 

Because Rush and Glenn are GODLIKE!!!!!!!!

 

I was recently in Cleveland. The roads were absolutely horrible, traffic was horrible, weather was horrible, everything looked filthy.

 

Sadly the psuedo-news is the new paradigm for how people form their veiws. Fox has mastered the concept far more readily than any of the other networks. So you get much more in the way of opinion influence from the Fox people.

The Daily Show has touched on this a few times, brilliantly. Just the other night (not sure if it was a rerun) they had a great episode that churned out one of the best quotes I have heard this year/ever:

"Jon, you think politicians want to win their arguments, when in reality they just want to keep having them."

Jon Stewart also apeared (I think on 60 Minutes?) years back and discussed how its that conflict that gets the ratings. Its that conflict that gets attention. The Daily Show and the Colbert Report are the only news shows I watch. Dead Serious. All other info I get from various online sources. I cant stand the self-righteous half truth of the network news. The 'comedy' shows quite honestly have similar hard news value while being much less biased. Their target audience wants the rediculus to be brought forth, and at this point you dont have to get creative in the editing room to make that happen. Thus their matirial writes itself and thus is a lot more honest in a very real way.

I wish people would get that news networks have to get ratings to make money. It beats the hell out of state run TV, but at the same time everyone on Earth has an agenda and that is theirs. These big bold sky-is-falling shows are on the air because they make money, not because they are good news. I watched about 15 minutes of Beck once. He labeled progressives as inhuman monsters because the crew of the Sea Sheperd risked Japanese sailors lives to save whales. I am not joking. Its not enough to TV personalities for competing points of veiw to be dead wrong. They have to be evil. Well-intentioned disagreement doesnt get ratings. You need Darth vader. Hence why you get Beck and Limbaugh. They can summon Darth from the depths.

Its pretty easy to do right now as well, because one of the pincipal arguments against nationalized health care (for me anyway) is that its too much power for the Gov. I dont think that the gov is inherently evil, I just have to acknowledge the historical trends of govs that are too powerful. But that whole concpet of not really trusting the gov makes it real easy to put on the old Darth Vader suit for ratings and glory. You just have to put it on whichever party you dont like.

 

And that was before you even got out of the airport.

 

thank you for keeping an open mind.

 

So what you're saying is what comes out of Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck's mouth is less truthful because they're working for a network channel pushing an agenda for ratings than Jon Stewart, a COMEDIAN more truthful how? I think he is just as politically motivated as the former, and care even less about his opinion than I do Glenn or Rush which isn't much to begin with.

Fact of the matter is all of the above are employed as entertainers. End of story.

 

I dont know about that. The DD and CR have their agenda to get ratings for sure. But my point is that all they have to do in order to accomplish that is be funny. Being funny allows them to be a much more equal opportunity lampooner than a 'conservative' or 'progressive' (meaningless labels at this point) commentator can be. They dont have to make person X seem outright evil, just incompetent. Which IMHO is much closer to the truth. YMMV.

 

Okay now that I can agree with.

 

WTF...we're not supposed to agree.

fight fight fight fight



I learned to stay out of political discussions after spending years on sport-touring.net where the P&R section was heavily weighted in the liberal direction. Arguments got so bad (and personal) they closed and deleted the whole section (all those beautiful time consuming posts), and banned some of the major offenders. We moved to another forum, but it sucked even worse, and the shrill voices only got louder.

I've seen the ugly streaks in both sides of the debate, and don't like either.

I will say this on topic: You shouldn't have to go around regular legislative procedure in order to accomplish your goals. Period. There is a reason our government functions as it does.

And +1 on the power grab...

 

This

 

I'll agree with that. Unfortunately (and I'm gonna say this without research), every congress and president has probably done it in the history of the USA

 

But have they ever done it for such sweeping legislation?