What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Status
Not open for further replies.
what is wrong with you? You just admitted 6.4 percent of that is employer-side. Are they going to pass that on to me? Unlikely since they're ALREADY PAYING MORE THAN THAT FOR MY INSURANCE NOW. And I'm paying almost $4K/yr in insurance premiums for a family of 3. That's after my employer pays over 80% of the premium.
Hey never let facts get in the way of a good argument.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Kep,
One of the problems with intermittent viewing is when a long previous post perks one's interest. As such I'll preface this question with two statements: A) Sorry for the delay B) No troll intended.

The premise of this article seems to be that Repubs would be morally corrupt to vote for tD in view of his racist viewpoint being immoral. Your comments seem to concur with this premise. However, the author also states that those who voted for the Iraq war for political expediency (? kinda what HRC did) are similarly morally corrupt. Now, one could argue the "level" of the moral corruptness involved but to my way of thinking this would be akin to arguing the levels of Hitler/Stalin or Pig feces/Cow feces. So if this article is correct in it's assumptions that Repubs with a conscience should not vote for a moral inept tD, why should/will you do similarly and vote for HRC?

Again, not trying to troll here, just interested in why you are willing to pinch your nose and go with the lesser of two evils (whom you seem to feel is still extremely evil) rather than sticking to principle. Is it being in a purple state? I admittedly have the luxury/curse of being in a state that is pretty predictable in their voting patterns so I can go the principle route without fear of the greater evil getting the win. But the question persists, when is it OK to take the path of least resistance (you know, like HRC did with the Iraq war)?

I take no offense at all, and in fact I drew exactly the same conclusion from the article that you did.

I'll give it the old college try. Iraq and Drumpf are first order crimes. Supporting somebody who supported them is a second-order crime. So, if we're given the choice, we should choose a second-order crime to be farther from direct responsibility for reprehensible conduct. If I vote for Hillary I am supporting a scumbucket, whereas if I vote for Drumpf I am a scumbucket.

Whaddya think? Personally I don't buy it. My calculation of moral turpitude doesn't work that way. But I was raised Catholic so I have an absolutist view of guilt. ;)
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Guys, again lets spend some time in reality and not in some drug induced fantasyland. If you think employers aren't going to stick workers with that extra payroll tax, and are just willingly going to eat it because Sanders waved his magic wand, you are out of your effin minds. Your paycheck is going to have the usual state, fed, etc deductions, only there's going to be an extra one called "Bernie tax" showing you just how much he's collecting from you. Unless he plans on passing a law specifically saying business cannot do this, which would surely end up in a long legal battle, there is zero reason why they can't do this.

When did Sanders supporters turn into a cult? :confused:
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

what is wrong with you? You just admitted 6.4 percent of that is employer-side. Are they going to pass that on to me? Unlikely since they're ALREADY PAYING MORE THAN THAT FOR MY INSURANCE NOW. And I'm paying almost $4K/yr in insurance premiums for a family of 3. That's after my employer pays 80% of the premium.

YES!!!!! Let me get this straight. People have spent the last year demonizing any and all things corporate as evil itself, BUT these same evil corporations are then going to WILLINGLY give up the chance to pass an extra tax onto you? Especially after they get socked with additional taxes for other Bernie proposals unrelated to this? Ooooookaaayyyyy. Do you people ever think things through?
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

YES!!!!! Let me get this straight. People have spent the last year demonizing any and all things corporate as evil itself, BUT these same evil corporations are then going to WILLINGLY give up the chance to pass an extra tax onto you? Especially after they get socked with additional taxes for other Bernie proposals unrelated to this? Ooooookaaayyyyy. Do you people ever think things through?

You can't spell "Grover Norquist" without "(r)over"...
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

When did Hillary supporters turn into the Club for Growth? :confused:

Kep I'm sorry but you've become a blithering idiot when it comes to Bernie. I'm glad you found a new hero, but I sure do wish you'd do it with your eyes open. Seems if Sanders told you to drop to your knees, close your eyes and open your mouth, you'd do so without even peeking to see what exactly the old dude had in mind for you.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I take no offense at all, and in fact I drew exactly the same conclusion from the article that you did.

I'll give it the old college try. Iraq and Drumpf are first order crimes. Supporting somebody who supported them is a second-order crime. So, if we're given the choice, we should choose a second-order crime to be farther from direct responsibility for reprehensible conduct. If I vote for Hillary I am supporting a scumbucket, whereas if I vote for Drumpf I am a scumbucket.

Whaddya think? Personally I don't buy it. My calculation of moral turpitude doesn't work that way. But I was raised Catholic so I have an absolutist view of guilt. ;)
Maybe it's better to go with the concept of "A day without a good rationalization is like a day without sunshine"

Being married to a Catholic, I have been frequently exposed to said absoluteness. It's kind of rubbed off some. Again, I have the luxury of a state where I can stand by principle because the outcome is pretty much set here. Not sure how I'd vote if I lived in a purple state. Since I don't, I'm all in for Limberbutt McCubbins
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Kep I'm sorry but you've become a blithering idiot when it comes to Bernie. I'm glad you found a new hero, but I sure do wish you'd do it with your eyes open. Seems if Sanders told you to drop to your knees, close your eyes and open your mouth, you'd do so without even peeking to see what exactly the old dude had in mind for you.

You can't just flail and attack and mug faces and insult and scoff. You're at the substance table, now. Play or move along.
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Maybe it's better to go with the concept of "A day without a good rationalization is like a day without sunshine"

Being married to a Catholic, I have been frequently exposed to said absoluteness. It's kind of rubbed off some. Again, I have the luxury of a state where I can stand by principle because the outcome is pretty much set here. Not sure how I'd vote if I lived in a purple state. Since I don't, I'm all in for Limberbutt McCubbins

I'm holding out for Deez Nuts.

Moral absolutism starts out OK but next thing you know Kant is telling the Nazis where Anne Frank's hiding because lying is wrong. What did Emerson say? "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." So too moral absolutes. :)
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

YES!!!!! Let me get this straight. People have spent the last year demonizing any and all things corporate as evil itself, BUT these same evil corporations are then going to WILLINGLY give up the chance to pass an extra tax onto you? Especially after they get socked with additional taxes for other Bernie proposals unrelated to this? Ooooookaaayyyyy. Do you people ever think things through?

the Bernie tax would be LESS than what they are paying now. They're paying $18,000-$20,000/yr for my insurance now. They haven't raised my premium (or reduced benefits) since 2010. If they were going to stick the Bernie tax to me, they would have been sticking it to me more than they are now for my insurance.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I'm holding out for Deez Nuts.

Moral absolutism starts out OK but next thing you know Kant is telling the Nazis where Anne Frank's hiding because lying is wrong. What did Emerson say? "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." So too moral absolutes. :)

Being a science major who skated through the liberal arts portion of my undergrad career, I have to go with the following:

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
Groucho Marx
 
Refutation.

But nice try.

Lies like Rover just posted are why for years I have been asking the Democrats to explicitly attach to every proposal the exclusion of the first $x from all taxation, where x is the median income (currently, $51k).

Nobody arguing honestly will accuse Bernie Sanders of trying to shift an intolerable tax burden onto the poor and lower middle class. To with one breath fulminate against the Far Left and with the next argue that they're trying to sneak through taxes against low income people is not just self-contradictory, but Atwateresque.

The triangulation of the DLC by Bill Clinton was necessary in the 90s in the teeth of the "don't worry be happy" mindlessness of Reaganism. Now that Reaganism has been exposed as irresponsible and hopelessly corrupt, we can and should demand more from the Democratic party when it comes to economic justice. Tepid, Wall Street-approved weak sauce by the Dems got us into this mess. An intelligent, incisive FDR-esque remaking of our fiscal priorities right in the face of the plutocratic parasites is what is needed. Not just that, but it will be supported, because people are, rightfully, mad as hell as they're not gonna take it anymore.

The game's up, Rove. Cash out your winnings.

I think you stole my idea. Everyone files single. $45K exemption. No other deductions. 15% bracket. 25% on over $1 million.
 
Guys, again lets spend some time in reality and not in some drug induced fantasyland. If you think employers aren't going to stick workers with that extra payroll tax, and are just willingly going to eat it because Sanders waved his magic wand, you are out of your effin minds. Your paycheck is going to have the usual state, fed, etc deductions, only there's going to be an extra one called "Bernie tax" showing you just how much he's collecting from you. Unless he plans on passing a law specifically saying business cannot do this, which would surely end up in a long legal battle, there is zero reason why they can't do this.

When did Sanders supporters turn into a cult? :confused:

Can you point me to the line on your paystub where your employer sticks you with their FICA contributions? I'm guessing the answer is no.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

I think you stole my idea. Everyone files single. $45K exemption. No other deductions. 15% bracket. 25% on over $1 million.

A long time ago back when Cornell was good, I posted my idea, which is the two number tax system. You have t, a flat tax, and e, a personal exemption. Projected revenue has to equal the budget.

Conservatives will back a low e and low t to help the rich. Liberals will back a high t and a high e to help the middle class. We decide which numbers get picked by choosing the makeup of Congress. Easy, peasy.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

It doesn't matter anyway. Even if Rover's stupid logic were sound, my taxes aren't going to go up because it's not like BernieCare would make it through congress anyway. I'm under no delusions that Bernie would be able to accomplish everything he's proposed. I'm hoping it is the start of a march towards a more democratic socialist America. A Denmark with guns and an obesity problem.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Watching daytime TV again :o
The View (all women and 3 people of color) had on Ben Carson. They asked him how he, as a black man of faith, could endorse tD. tD is mysogynist, racist, from big money, etc. Would that not be against his ethics and morals? I watched him fascinated with his pseudo-logic. Man does he come across as dumb. His answer- well, we need to get out the establishment. We need to focus on the important things. They asked if he didn't think the inflammatory comments, lies about other candidates (including saying Carson was a child molester- missed that one!), his vitriol, were important Carson answered again it was his job to think about what is important for the country. Then said- you never saw protesters at the 'Left's' rallies :confused: This is pertinent how? (The answer to that is probably because they have enough skill to make a joke and move on).

a) How did this guy make it thru medical school where thinking of consequences is an important part of success? b) I would never, never, never let this guy near me with a scalpel. He is way too rigid in his thinking. If something didn't go as he planned- oh oh. He thinks he failed to gain traction because he was not inflammatory enough and not crazy enough. More likely because he is not the brightest lightbulb on the tree.

Initially thought he was someone to consider until he opened his mouth and revealed what a loon he is
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Forgot- almost immediately tD tweeted the women were all idiots or some such. Carson, meanwhile, tweeted something much more gracious - he was glad they listened to him even if they didn't agree with him.

Not working is giving me a very jaundiced view of human intelligence.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

a) How did this guy make it thru medical school where thinking of consequences is an important part of success? b) I would never, never, never let this guy near me with a scalpel.

Dr. Mrs. thinks something happened to him. Everything from the weird affect to the disjointed, nonsensical sentence structure to the fixation on delusional ideas and magical thinking screams "chip error; core dump imminent."

He cannot have been this f-cked up when he was a doctor. Not only would he never have made it through med school; he'd never even had made it through the entrance interview.

This dude was once head of Pediatric Medicine at Johns Hopkins. Some sort of Flowers for Algernon sh-t happened to him.
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part, let's say, X: There's a red moon rising On the Cuyahoga River

Dr. Strangewords also dropped, "Your rights end when they begin to infringe upon the rights of others" on The View. Apparently he really was sleeping through all those Republican debates.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top