Where are the protests?

[Lonestar_logic]

Lone -- you need to stop re-posting from right-wing blogsites.

Why?

All you have to do is come up with a counter argument and "you need to stop re-posting from right-wing blogsites" isn't one.

Because .org websites will generally offer biased opinions (both right and left). In this case, I've already given you the sourced information which ironically has also been verified by conservative Heritage Foundation. My point is that blogs, like opinion pages, are embellished to fit an agenda, and do not necessarily hold all the facts needed to do your own analysis. If within a blog site, it gives you a hyperlink to other referenced sources, go to those also. Too many people believe everything they read on the Internet as being gospel. The Net is only as smart as the people doing the input.

Why not argue against the facts of the article and not the site from which it came?

You don't have any biases?

 

[Immanuel]

Because .org websites will generally offer biased opinions (both right and left). In this case, I've already given you the sourced information which ironically has also been verified by conservative Heritage Foundation. My point is that blogs, like opinion pages, are embellished to fit an agenda, and do not necessarily hold all the facts needed to do your own analysis. If within a blog site, it gives you a hyperlink to other referenced sources, go to those also. Too many people believe everything they read on the Internet as being gospel. The Net is only as smart as the people doing the input.

Except that the Heritage Foundation did say that the current proposal would kill private health insurance.

Immie

 

[BrianH]

i fail? you are the texan.

lol..... You realize Texas has one of the most, if not the strongest, economies in the country. "Fail" is hardly a word that describes Texas.

George W. Bush was born in New Haven Connecticut dumbass, if anything, his genes come from there....

http://www.thereisnobigfoot.com/images/doofus1.gif

 

[BrianH]

i fail? you are the texan.

lol..... You realize Texas has one of the most, if not the strongest, economies in the country. "Fail" is hardly a word that describes Texas.

Sadly, though, the highest rate of uninsured citizens of any state. 24.9%. That's 7% more than Mississippi.

That's because we're a border state and have shit loads of illegals and first generation Americans (born of illegals) that don't have any money to afford insurance<-- If you go back to you wikipedia page, notice that the southern border states have the highest number of uninsured. ...which is 1. The federal government's fault for not protecting and securing our borders, 2. The federal government's fault for not regulating insurance companies to allow for lower insurance costs, and 3. The federal government's fault for not allowing states to control their own borders.....Anything else?

California 18.6% (6,720,000)
Arizona 19.6% (1,219,000
Florida 20.5% (3,698,000)
New Mexico 21.9% (425,000)
Texas 24.4% (5,687,000)

See the trend...?

 

[noose4]

lol..... You realize Texas has one of the most, if not the strongest, economies in the country. "Fail" is hardly a word that describes Texas.

George W. Bush was born in New Haven Connecticut dumbass, if anything, his genes come from there....

http://www.thereisnobigfoot.com/images/doofus1.gif

which state was stupid enough to elect him governor oh genius of the low iq?

 

[BrianH]

George W. Bush was born in New Haven Connecticut dumbass, if anything, his genes come from there....

http://www.thereisnobigfoot.com/images/doofus1.gif

which state was stupid enough to elect him governor oh genius of the low iq?

Oh...got me there

And for the record, you can bash him as much as you want, but it still doesn't change the fact that Texas has one of the best economies in the Union. I'm sure I can dig back and find some shitty governors from your state.

 

[MaggieMae]

Why?

All you have to do is come up with a counter argument and "you need to stop re-posting from right-wing blogsites" isn't one.

Because .org websites will generally offer biased opinions (both right and left). In this case, I've already given you the sourced information which ironically has also been verified by conservative Heritage Foundation. My point is that blogs, like opinion pages, are embellished to fit an agenda, and do not necessarily hold all the facts needed to do your own analysis. If within a blog site, it gives you a hyperlink to other referenced sources, go to those also. Too many people believe everything they read on the Internet as being gospel. The Net is only as smart as the people doing the input.

Why not argue against the facts of the article and not the site from which it came?

You don't have any biases?

Why should I take the time to do the same research as Politifact? If you don't believe what they say, then post your own analysis by some other fact-checker, just not from a partisan website.

 

[MaggieMae]

Because .org websites will generally offer biased opinions (both right and left). In this case, I've already given you the sourced information which ironically has also been verified by conservative Heritage Foundation. My point is that blogs, like opinion pages, are embellished to fit an agenda, and do not necessarily hold all the facts needed to do your own analysis. If within a blog site, it gives you a hyperlink to other referenced sources, go to those also. Too many people believe everything they read on the Internet as being gospel. The Net is only as smart as the people doing the input.

Except that the Heritage Foundation did say that the current proposal would kill private health insurance.

Immie

It's an unproven assumption. I suppose they had to save face somehow.

 

[Immanuel]

Because .org websites will generally offer biased opinions (both right and left). In this case, I've already given you the sourced information which ironically has also been verified by conservative Heritage Foundation. My point is that blogs, like opinion pages, are embellished to fit an agenda, and do not necessarily hold all the facts needed to do your own analysis. If within a blog site, it gives you a hyperlink to other referenced sources, go to those also. Too many people believe everything they read on the Internet as being gospel. The Net is only as smart as the people doing the input.

Except that the Heritage Foundation did say that the current proposal would kill private health insurance.

Immie

It's an unproven assumption. I suppose they had to save face somehow.

They were your source. You introduced them into the discussion, not me. Now you want to exclude their assumption?

Immie

 

[MaggieMae]

George W. Bush was born in New Haven Connecticut dumbass, if anything, his genes come from there....

http://www.thereisnobigfoot.com/images/doofus1.gif

which state was stupid enough to elect him governor oh genius of the low iq?

Oh...got me there

And for the record, you can bash him as much as you want, but it still doesn't change the fact that Texas has one of the best economies in the Union. I'm sure I can dig back and find some shitty governors from your state.

I don't begrudge Texas it's economic wealth. It's where the oil is; it's where the oil industry is and all the supporting businesses (big and small). But all the wealth in the world doesn't mean it's put to the best use for its citizens.

 

[MaggieMae]

Except that the Heritage Foundation did say that the current proposal would kill private health insurance.

Immie

It's an unproven assumption. I suppose they had to save face somehow.

They were your source. You introduced them into the discussion, not me. Now you want to exclude their assumption?

Immie

The original IBD article made the claim as if it were indisputable. I used the Heritage concession simply to make the point that it is disputable. Let's face it, the whole health care initiative is full of assumptions not yet proven.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Because .org websites will generally offer biased opinions (both right and left). In this case, I've already given you the sourced information which ironically has also been verified by conservative Heritage Foundation. My point is that blogs, like opinion pages, are embellished to fit an agenda, and do not necessarily hold all the facts needed to do your own analysis. If within a blog site, it gives you a hyperlink to other referenced sources, go to those also. Too many people believe everything they read on the Internet as being gospel. The Net is only as smart as the people doing the input.

Why not argue against the facts of the article and not the site from which it came?

You don't have any biases?

Why should I take the time to do the same research as Politifact? If you don't believe what they say, then post your own analysis by some other fact-checker, just not from a partisan website.

I see so you can't argue the facts on your own, you rely on some website to do your thinking for you. And I've already witnessed folks debunking the so-called facts from Politifact.

I take you do have biases.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

which state was stupid enough to elect him governor oh genius of the low iq?

Oh...got me there

And for the record, you can bash him as much as you want, but it still doesn't change the fact that Texas has one of the best economies in the Union. I'm sure I can dig back and find some shitty governors from your state.

I don't begrudge Texas it's economic wealth. It's where the oil is; it's where the oil industry is and all the supporting businesses (big and small). But all the wealth in the world doesn't mean it's put to the best use for its citizens.

When was the last time you lived in Texas?

 

[Immanuel]

It's an unproven assumption. I suppose they had to save face somehow.

They were your source. You introduced them into the discussion, not me. Now you want to exclude their assumption?

Immie

The original IBD article made the claim as if it were indisputable. I used the Heritage concession simply to make the point that it is disputable. Let's face it, the whole health care initiative is full of assumptions not yet proven.

I agree the IBD article was wrong and they did a crappy job of correcting their mistakes.

I also agree that the initiative is full of assumtions not yet proven, but your side has made as many assumptions as my side.

Personally, I don't trust the pols of either side.

Immie

 

[BrianH]

which state was stupid enough to elect him governor oh genius of the low iq?

Oh...got me there

And for the record, you can bash him as much as you want, but it still doesn't change the fact that Texas has one of the best economies in the Union. I'm sure I can dig back and find some shitty governors from your state.

I don't begrudge Texas it's economic wealth. It's where the oil is; it's where the oil industry is and all the supporting businesses (big and small). But all the wealth in the world doesn't mean it's put to the best use for its citizens.

I agree 100%. I'm simply proving the Noose's use of the world "fail" to describe Texas or Texans would be an inaccurate word for discription.

Every state has certain areas where they could use improvement. I'm not saying that Texas is the best state by far, but I'm saying that calling Texas a failure reflects the lack of knowledge of current events as well as history.

 

[Maple]

by the government of our health care, that's why no protests, except that there are millions protesting the take over. Americans want reform of the current system the reform taking place in the private sector. Obama has totally misread this issue and thinks that Americans gave him a mandate to take it over. That's simply not the case and it is showing in the polling data and in these town hall meetings. I don't care how you libs want to paint it, the facts are in, this is a no-go.

In fact, Obama does not know the facts of his own bill, the people know more whats in this bill than he does.

 

[Sinatra]

by the government of our health care, that's why no protests, except that there are millions protesting the take over. Americans want reform of the current system the reform taking place in the private sector. Obama has totally misread this issue and thinks that Americans gave him a mandate to take it over. That's simply not the case and it is showing in the polling data and in these town hall meetings. I don't care how you libs want to paint it, the facts are in, this is a no-go.

In fact, Obama does not know the facts of his own bill, the people know more whats in this bill than he does.

Indeed - Obama, despite the media generated myth, appears to have little actual intellectual capacity.

And as far as misreading the American public, yes, he has certainly done that, and the damage to his political influence has been considerable, and there appears to be no lessening of this trend in the near term.

 

[MaggieMae]

Why not argue against the facts of the article and not the site from which it came?

You don't have any biases?

Why should I take the time to do the same research as Politifact? If you don't believe what they say, then post your own analysis by some other fact-checker, just not from a partisan website.

I see so you can't argue the facts on your own, you rely on some website to do your thinking for you. And I've already witnessed folks debunking the so-called facts from Politifact.

I take you do have biases.

Using your logic, no facts would ever exist, as one can only reach back so far for the original source. You're basically suggesting if I can't reach back far enough for sources and rely on those, then I should just make up stuff.

 

[MaggieMae]

Oh...got me there

And for the record, you can bash him as much as you want, but it still doesn't change the fact that Texas has one of the best economies in the Union. I'm sure I can dig back and find some shitty governors from your state.

I don't begrudge Texas it's economic wealth. It's where the oil is; it's where the oil industry is and all the supporting businesses (big and small). But all the wealth in the world doesn't mean it's put to the best use for its citizens.

When was the last time you lived in Texas?

I'm not being critical of Texas. Don't get your panties all in a wad. We know you think your state it the biggest baddest and bestist. But I did live there for about 8 months from 1977 through 1978 when my husband was on TDY, so I can't be a fair judge about its political climate. The people then were friendly, and the restaurants second only to New Orleans. The best BBQ ever! But it was hot hot hot and humid, way too much traffic (made LA freeways look like country roads on Christmas Day ), so it really wasn't a place I put on my list of places to retire.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Why should I take the time to do the same research as Politifact? If you don't believe what they say, then post your own analysis by some other fact-checker, just not from a partisan website.

I see so you can't argue the facts on your own, you rely on some website to do your thinking for you. And I've already witnessed folks debunking the so-called facts from Politifact.

I take you do have biases.

Using your logic, no facts would ever exist, as one can only reach back so far for the original source. You're basically suggesting if I can't reach back far enough for sources and rely on those, then I should just make up stuff.

No what I'm saying is, instead of whining about where the article originated or from whence it came, argue the facts presented in said argument.

You claimed I used a biased source, well I'd argue that every source is biased. But that doesn't take away the facts (that can either be proven true or disproven) that are presented. You elect to trust in a website to make that judgement for you.

Politifact has been shown to be biased, it has been shown in this thread alone to be inaccurate. But yet you elect to use that as a reputable source, while discrediting the source I cited. By the way I only offered the source to support my argument, it wasn't the basis for my argument.

Case in point:
Biased PolitiFact.com Covers for ACORN, Attacks Michele Bachmann | NewsBusters.org