patrick.net

Nice try Abe. Here are the facts:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/15/AR2010071506964.html

Abe ... be careful. Obama might want to put a tax on the facts, in which case you're going to pay plenty.

I would personally like to see a tax on liberal lies. We'd have a balanced budget in no time.

ObamaCare slipped in a tax on gold coin dealers too. Wow! What a surprise! He lied to us again.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/gold-coin-dealers-decry-tax-law/story?id=11211611

RayAmerica says

I would personally like to see a tax on liberal lies. We’d have a balanced budget in no time.

That wouldn't work, the liberal 'lies' aren't worth the paper they are written on. Abe forgot to mention the death panels too.

RayAmerica says

I would personally like to see a tax on liberal lies. We’d have a balanced budget in no time.

I like that. Abe lies in his OP, and Ray posts that he's like to tax liberal lies... Are you implying that Abe is a liberal? Because I'd have to disagree with that assessment.

ObamaCare slipped in a tax on gold coin dealers too.
There is no new tax on gold coin dealers; there is, however, burdensome overhead in which they will be required to report (via 1099) purchases of over $600.

a4adam says

Abe forgot to mention the death panels too.

Yes, don't forget the death panels. I hear that Hillary Clinton is going to resurrect Hitler so he can resurrect Dr. Josef Mengele to become the Surgeon General. Dr. Josef Mengele will oversee the formation of these death panels. I heard it on AM radio and saw it on Fox News so it must be true.

Gosh, I wonder whether a little cooperation from republicans might have made the initial version of this a little better.

Sadly, a bad ObamaCare makes republicans happy.

Had Obama gotten through a MUCH MUCH better bill, that would have made republicans very unhappy.

That's really all you need to know to understand where our government is at politically.

Well, I heard that Obama eats babies for breakfast.

The moment I post this, it's on the interwebs. Therefore it must be true.

My dear, sadly misinformed Nomo... abeabe is onto something. Not his points of misinformation, but rather the reality that we have too many freedoms. It's too oppressive...

Obama is a disaster. Unfortunately the democratic supporters won't be able to admit their own leadership's faults for at least another 10 years.

I am sure that Obama believes in his egalitarian fairy tale. That doesn't make his failures any easier to stomache.

Unfortunately it will take much longer than 2 years for the democrats to see fault in their savior or their party. It took most republican supporters more than 20 years admit the same.

The Democrat supporters today accuse any republican supporter of being uneducated--which is exactly the same dense logic the 1985 Republicans used. The pundits convince people to instantly assume a criticism of a political party puts that critiquer into the opposite camp--an instant intellectual strawman. This strawman deserves to be accused of skimming thought patterns from AM radio, being a religious wingnut, or is clearly an uneducated simpleton.

It is very disappointing to watch many of the people who validly criticised Bush and the republicans suddenly lose any critical thought process now that the thiefs are labelled "democrats".

Nomograph says

In actuality, you have it so good that you actually have to propagate nonsense so you can pretend to be victimized.

What????? Nomo, you are embarrassing yourself. This sentiment is disingenuous, at best. Could you imagine saying the same thing to someone who was criticising Bush? It would sound absurd, as it should. He must've learned this from AM talk radio.

elliemae says

Well, I heard that Obama eats babies for breakfast.
The moment I post this, it’s on the interwebs. Therefore it must be true.

Do you have a reason for posting this dribble? If you were on the other side of the discussion, you would have been flamed by Nomo, yourself, and Simcha at a minimum for being a troll be now.

Nomo, Ellie, and Simcha all seem very intelligent...right up until it comes time to evaluate the democrats critically. Please explain what I'm missing.

CBOEtrader says

Please explain what I’m missing.

Abeabe posted inflammatory dribble. He's reactive, responding to rumors he's read or heard from a guy he sat next to on the bus...

Healthcare should never be an option.

CBOE--

Well, how about you start by explaining why you think Obama is a disaster? What you feel could have been done differently. Instead of taking four paragraphs to say "Obama bad" and that democrats are too brainwashed to see it, how about you persuasively detail his flaws?

CBOEtrader says

Nomograph says
In actuality, you have it so good that you actually have to propagate nonsense so you can pretend to be victimized.

What????? Nomo, you are embarrassing yourself. This sentiment is disingenuous, at best. Could you imagine saying the same thing to someone who was criticising Bush? It would sound absurd, as it should. He must’ve learned this from AM talk radio.

I thought this was right on. IT's not clear how much of Abes ranting about Obama you have heard. It's not like he is usually giving constructive criticism. Notice his list above doesn't include any of the things that might be construed as positive ( such as tax credits to small businesses (I know it needs to be tweaked)).

I'm sure that you too were in the camp that didn't want any kind of health care reform, and if we had to have it, you wanted it to be terrible so that it could be overturned and or that Obama would not be deemed successful.

Sorry, it's not that bad. If we had legislators who all truly wanted what's best for the people, it could have been way better. Who knows how long it will be before it's decent ( maybe it will take until after the boomers die), but at least the foot is in the door, on something that most of us believe should be a right not an earned privelidge.

You are right about us all having our biases ( including you - gosh, I wonder whether Reagan is your all time political hero. The 1985 comment was the giveaway). By the way, even 30 years after the fact, let alone 10 years I don't think Carter was nearly as bad as some think.

Your criticism of Nomo was wrong, because sometimes a person who appears from a biased perspective to be close minded wingnut really is a close minded wingnut.

marcus says

maybe it will take until after the boomers die

A lot of things have to wait until the boomers finally croak.

Gay marriage may finally have a chance once the boomers die.

People in Generation X may finally be able to move into senior positions once boomers die.

Much of the old-fashioned racism will start to ease once boomers die.

The Rethuglican Party will loose most of its members once boomers die. (Let's not forget that they betrayed their Liberal roots back in the '80s embracing Reaganomics (A.K.A. Voodoo Economics) and greed.)

Social security may be viable again once boomers die.

Sadly, many things will improve for other age groups once boomers finally die and stop hoarding all the resources.

Look on the bright side, many of these boomers did serious drugs in the 60's and they smoked heavily for years on end. They may not be the longest-lived generation. And if Rayray and Abebabe is right the death panels will most likely be ending their lives before long due to the cost of their care.

(I'm in Generation X. Could you guess?)

And if you think I'm totally serious, I have a multi-million dollar shack in Marin to sell you. You don't have to disclose your income. *wink*

tatupu70 says

CBOE–
Well, how about you start by explaining why you think Obama is a disaster?

You are the lone individual in this thread that has thus far posted anything constructive. Thanks for the link to the washington post article. Since that post, this thread hasn't been about Obama's policies. Every comment after that was about how deluded, crazy, misinformed, etc... Abe must be for criticising Obama. Therefore, I was joining the discussion, from a different perspective. Though, just for you I will write a very quick, and probably boring, list of my main issues with Obama in a different thread in the near future.

elliemae says

Abeabe posted inflammatory dribble.

If you feel his posts are meaningless, why do you engage him at all? At least Abe doesn't attack someone directly for the political opinions they express in a forum.
marcus says

Notice his list above doesn’t include any of the things that might be construed as positive

Sure, but you do realize that he was trying to make a case against the bill, right? You will also notice that none of the responses to the OP include "any of the things that might be construed as positive." There has not been a single attempt at defending the bill, just personal flames.

marcus says

I’m sure that you too were in the camp that didn’t want any kind of health care reform, and if we had to have it, you wanted it to be terrible so that it could be overturned and or that Obama would not be deemed successful.

OMFG!!! So...after I point out that democrat supporters pull out a ready-made intellectual strawman in response to any criticism, you go ahead and do exactly that. Unbelievable. I really do hope this was a failed attempt at humor.

Furthermore, niceintellectual slight of hand trick using the phrase "any kind of health care reform." Republicans were against the democratic ideas for health care reform, not against "any kind" of reform. At least try to have some integrity when presenting your strawman.

marcus says

You are right about us all having our biases ( including you - gosh, I wonder whether Reagan is your all time political hero. The 1985 comment was the giveaway).

Arguing with the strawman in your pocket again? Thanks for proving my point, I guess. I honestly don't know how to respond to this without being an enormous asshole. Did you even read my post?

Did you notice that I referred to the criticisms of Bush and the republicans as valid? Did you pick up on the fact that I compared the blind partisan idiocy of the 1985 republicans, to today's democrats? When you read, do you just skim for hot words and fill in the rest with ready made filler?

Simply unbelievable.

Nomograph says

This is already been debunked numerous times on this board and he knows it, and the first commenter debunked it again. I have ZERO respect for people who knowingly propagate lies, and I have ZERO respect for people who do so for the purpose of wallowing in a victim mentality. I don’t have a whole lot of respect for those who defend propagandists either.

Agreed. Your posts add value to the thread when you actually address the argument made, and don't attack the person. Why didn't you just say this to begin with?

I guess it is a strawman if I don't have proof.

But how do I reconcile you're supposedly being independent (nonpartisan) with your claim that the republicans were not against "any kind of (health care)reform."

I suppose you are aware that much of the reform we got was very close to what was proposed by Romney.

If you are so above the fray then tell me which is more true.

(A) Republicans were against "democrat ideas" because of embedded ideological differences regarding that specific policy.

(B) Republicans were against ideas that come from democrats, because successful policy changes would enhance and preserve democrat leadership.

(in B I'm putting it too nicely - it's really more like bad sportsmanship on the part of republicans)

Even though I can't prove it, if you think that republicans truly wanted a better health care bill, and that they were willing to play ball, then I would BET you have a strong republican leaning bias. I am saying I would bet. That is not a strawman argument. It is a logical inference that I am willing to jump to.

Also, I believe that anyone reading my commentary, knows that the parenthetical part of my agreement with implied point about bias, was not an argument, let alone a strawman argument. It is only conjecture about you're political bias.

So which is it A or B ?

CBOEtrader says

Did you pick up on the fact that I compared the blind partisan idiocy of the 1985 republicans, to today’s democrats?

I thought that you thought that somehow Republicans in 1985 were talking about democrats being idiots much like I might refer to many ignorant republicans. I don't remember that, (when I was on the CBOE) but if it were a good comparison, then it would mean that (you think) there really were some democrats that deserved to be considered idiots as much as Glenn Beck or half of the Tea Party people do now. Hence the inference about Reagan.

(Yes, the generalization of democratic idiocy would imply that there were a lot of idiots - in the same way that generalizations now about republicans or the Tea Party now, even if incorrect are based on the idiocy of many.)

If I am wrong, it is not because I didn't read it. It's because I did.

And for the record, you were sort of an asshole.

marcus says

Republicans were against ideas that come from democrats, because successful policy changes would enhance and preserve democrat leadership.

"If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him." -- Sen DeMint, 2009.

CBOEtrader says

There has not been a single attempt at defending the bill, just personal flames.

That's probably because, and I have certainly implied this, I don't love the bill. It's nowhere near what it should have been. But I blame republicans for this. He won the election promising change. You have republican legislators saying I'll be damned if we're going to let him do any of his change.

And then you have right wingers (note: I don't say conservatives) on this forum and other blogs saying things like "how do you like Obama's hope and change now?"

They say "we get the leadership we deserve." In my opinion, this time for some fluky reasons we got a leader way better than we deserve, and now we are having the not so fun time of seeing how that plays out.

CBOEtrader says

If you feel his posts are meaningless, why do you engage him at all? At least Abe doesn’t attack someone directly for the political opinions they express in a forum.

If he were to post something that was accurate, and was something beyond "I hate Obama" there might be a debate. We're waiting.

marcus says

I guess it is a strawman if I don’t have proof.

It's a strawman because you conjured up an obviously flawed argument that I didn't make, based on an affiliation that I don't have.

marcus says

But how do I reconcile you’re supposedly being independent (nonpartisan) with your claim that the republicans were not against “any kind of (health care)reform.”

Your statement about the republicans being against "any kind of reform" is nonsense propoganda. The republicans were unified against the bill that was passed. There is a huge difference between these two concepts. I do see how it would help the democrats to conflate the two though, and many media pundits have done just that.

Let's not forget how that exchange started though. You assumed I was the worst kind of republican moron based on a generic criticism of Obama. It would be like me calling you a pinko, commie, anti-american welfare recipient for saying you disagree with the Patriot act. Remember when the republicans and fox news jerks were calling anyone against the Afghan/Iraq wars as hating America? It was just as stupid when they did that, as it is when the democrats accuse someone critical of the healthcare reform bill as being racist.

Your assumptions about me were wrong. You were debating against a fabricated strawman argument. We can all agree on this and move on right?

marcus says

If you are so above the fray then tell me which is more true.
(A) Republicans were against “democrat ideas” because of embedded ideological differences regarding that specific policy.
(B) Republicans were against ideas that come from democrats, because successful policy changes would enhance and preserve democrat leadership.

I think they both played a major role. I don't pretend to know the motivation of others. I do think that republicans publicly stated some version of both A and B though. This has nothing to do with the discussion at hand though. The democrats are in power now. Our attention should be focused on the bills they are passing rather than on why the republicans didn't vote for these bills.

marcus says

Even though I can’t prove it, if you think that republicans truly wanted a better health care bill, and that they were willing to play ball, then I would BET you have a strong republican leaning bias.

I think that every American wants healthcare reform. I have never heard a republican, democrat, or anyone else, say they like things the way they are. That is all. This does not mean that I support the republicans or the democrats. Why do I have to keep explaining this to you? Or back to my original question/observation: why is it so darn hard for a democrat to hear a criticism of Obama without assuming the critiquer is some bad republican stereotype? This idiocy happens on both sides, and is equally frustrating. Moreso though, it enables the politicians to cheat, steal, and mislead.

marcus says

I thought that you thought that somehow Republicans in 1985 were talking about democrats being idiots much like I might refer to many ignorant republicans.

You miss my point, yet again. The 1985 republicans were so far up their own asses that they felt any criticism could only come from someone who was economically uneducated, a communist, etc. Their supporters put their heads in the sand for 25 years while the leadership raped and pillaged--all in the name of supposed "free markets", supply-side economics, and freedom. I am concerned that the Democrats are now showing signs of following in that same pattern.

marcus says

That’s probably because, and I have certainly implied this, I don’t love the bill. It’s nowhere near what it should have been. But I blame republicans for this. He won the election promising change. You have republican legislators saying I’ll be damned if we’re going to let him do any of his change.

You blame a bill that was pushed through without a single republican vote on the republicans? The lack of accountability that the democrats hold their leadership to is absolutely amazing. This is 1985 all over again.

I'm going to boil this way down. My original post was essentially triggered by a criticism of Nomograph that you have basically taken back. I thought you're criticism was wrong, either because you haven't been reading what Abe says over time, or because deep down you are a flaming right winger.

That was it. Simple, no debate.

I get it that I was (maybe) wrong about it being the latter.

Nomograph's defense of himself was far better than mine. Actually I didn't even try to address the specific claim about Abe making stuff up.

I don't want to try to make my point anymore about the current republican party. It is unlike anything in my lifetime. I'm in my mid fifties. I don't like the health care bill, but I believe that rather than being rescinded they are going to have to improve it over time and they will.

CBOEtrader says

You were debating

Okay...but if I wasn't couldn't I say that is a strawman ?

CBOEtrader says

Your statement about the republicans being against “any kind of reform” is nonsense propoganda.

Glad you were paying attention. I suppose that you don't believe that extreme factions in the GOP tell legislators "either vote against this, or you're history. " Have you seen what they have McCain saying to try to get reelected. How many moderates have they taken out so far. I've lost track.

I'm done. You really smacked me down okay ? Good job.

marcus says

CBOEtrader says
Your statement about the republicans being against “any kind of reform” is nonsense propoganda.

I suppose that you don’t believe that extreme factions in the GOP tell legislators “either vote against this, or you’re history. ”

Do you really not see the difference between these two distinct ideas?marcus says

McCain saying to try to get reelected.

McCain sucks. He has no chance. The GOP would be throwing in the towel with that ticket. There is little chance the republicans could produce a figurehead that could go up against Obama's eloquence. There is a decent chance that Obama becomes a lame president for a large portion of his time in office though, if democrats lose control of congress.

marcus says

CBOEtrader says
You were debating
Okay…but if I wasn’t couldn’t I say that is a strawman ?

Sigh...No. "A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar yet weaker proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

marcus says

You really smacked me down okay ?

To be fair, you deserved it.

I know what a strawman is.

CBOEtrader says

To be fair, you deserved it.

psuedointellect. Truth is, I never wanted to argue with you because you are a jackass who had a obviously big day yesterday. Can't tell whether it was big up, or big down, just know that it brought out....

Oh crap. There I go with my strawman again.

My advice to CBOETrader. Leave this alone for a few days and then read our little exchange. You might then be able to comprehend my point, even if your bias still prevents you from agreeing with it.