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.
Convention junkies can obsess details here!
- Thread starter FreshFish
- Start date
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
The thing is, even when he was calling you an ignorant POS you had to laugh it was worded in such a clever way
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
In response to a diminishing number of requests, one last weather report: We had more rain in Phoenix last night than there was in Charlotte.
And whether you like it or not, libs, your party's philosophical inspiration is now Cynthia McKinney. Remember what her father said when he was asked why she'd lost? "J-e-w-s."
It's hard to imagine a party that's home to so many Jews would be, in a very real sense, so anti-Semitic. And the anti-Semitism in black America is especially hard to fathom, given that Jews participated in and died for (Schwerner and Goodman in Neshoba County, Mississippi to name two) the cause of civil rights. Yet both reverands, among others (leaving out for the moment Calyopso Louis) have uttered, repeatedly, the worst sorts of slurs against Jews. They've said it publicly. And Democrats simply don't have the courage to at least tell them to shut the eff up. The platform kerfuffle is merely the latest manifestation. Sooner or later they'll get around to including extensive quotes from "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" in some future platform. It's sad, really.
In response to a diminishing number of requests, one last weather report: We had more rain in Phoenix last night than there was in Charlotte.
And whether you like it or not, libs, your party's philosophical inspiration is now Cynthia McKinney. Remember what her father said when he was asked why she'd lost? "J-e-w-s."
It's hard to imagine a party that's home to so many Jews would be, in a very real sense, so anti-Semitic. And the anti-Semitism in black America is especially hard to fathom, given that Jews participated in and died for (Schwerner and Goodman in Neshoba County, Mississippi to name two) the cause of civil rights. Yet both reverands, among others (leaving out for the moment Calyopso Louis) have uttered, repeatedly, the worst sorts of slurs against Jews. They've said it publicly. And Democrats simply don't have the courage to at least tell them to shut the eff up. The platform kerfuffle is merely the latest manifestation. Sooner or later they'll get around to including extensive quotes from "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" in some future platform. It's sad, really.
Last edited:
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Um, you do realize that person following the logic that you and Scooby just articulated could just as easily argue that by sterilizing young women, we'd save even more money, right?
With today's arthroscopic surgery techniques, for a few hundred dollars once, we'd save lots of money: no need for on-going birth control expenses, and even fewer pregnancies still. Even if birth control pills are $9 per month without insurance, that's $108 per year, or over $2,000. Also, birth control pills are not 100% effective, while sterilization is much more certain.
C'mon guys, do you even try to think things through to their conclusions before you have an emotional outburst that the rest of us have to put up with?
Most of the time you both do much better than this. I'm disappointed, are your standards slipping?
Um, you do realize that person following the logic that you and Scooby just articulated could just as easily argue that by sterilizing young women, we'd save even more money, right?
With today's arthroscopic surgery techniques, for a few hundred dollars once, we'd save lots of money: no need for on-going birth control expenses, and even fewer pregnancies still. Even if birth control pills are $9 per month without insurance, that's $108 per year, or over $2,000. Also, birth control pills are not 100% effective, while sterilization is much more certain.
C'mon guys, do you even try to think things through to their conclusions before you have an emotional outburst that the rest of us have to put up with?
Most of the time you both do much better than this. I'm disappointed, are your standards slipping?
FadeToBlack&Gold
8647
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Given the interest in grandchildren that many parents and grandparents develop, not to mention the people in my age group (25-40) who want kids, how many do you think would endorse this move? You're being ridiculous, and you know it.
Given the interest in grandchildren that many parents and grandparents develop, not to mention the people in my age group (25-40) who want kids, how many do you think would endorse this move? You're being ridiculous, and you know it.
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
And the Democrats are now firmly behind illegal immigration. During her speech last night (which you might have missed, because the networks certainly weren't going to show the pandering) Ms. Veliz referred to herself as an "American." And said she felt as much like an "American" as any of her neighbors. There's just that pesky business about citizenship, which is clearly just a technicality in the minds of today's Democrat party, so anxious are they to troll for votes in this emerging demographic. Not once in her speech did the young lady mention citizenship or express any desire to become one. After all, she feels just as "American" as any of her friends, so why bother?
Anti-Semitism and Illegal Aliens, a winning combination?
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2012/09/illegal-alien-benita-veliz-speech-to.html
And the Democrats are now firmly behind illegal immigration. During her speech last night (which you might have missed, because the networks certainly weren't going to show the pandering) Ms. Veliz referred to herself as an "American." And said she felt as much like an "American" as any of her neighbors. There's just that pesky business about citizenship, which is clearly just a technicality in the minds of today's Democrat party, so anxious are they to troll for votes in this emerging demographic. Not once in her speech did the young lady mention citizenship or express any desire to become one. After all, she feels just as "American" as any of her friends, so why bother?
Anti-Semitism and Illegal Aliens, a winning combination?
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2012/09/illegal-alien-benita-veliz-speech-to.html
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Yes, once we fix your post, you nailed it! The purpose of satire is to take something stupid another person said, and exaggerate it, in order to amplify just how stupid the original statement was. You knew that, right?
As an aside, I just realized elsewhere how ridiculous some of this sounds when you put it into context. Lots of dental plans don't cover orthodontia, yet there was not a single kid with crooked teeth at the convention or testifying before Congress. Lots of health plans restrict chiropractic coverage, yet I haven't heard a single voice speak about how outrageously this omission makes victims out of people with scoliosis. From all accounts, Sandra Fluke has a pretty decent health plan, and like most health plans, there are various limits on coverage. Lots of people want their conditions covered more fully than they are. Even under PPACA there are limits on coverage, you still have to pay for aspirin and there are plenty of co-pays and deductibles and lists of drugs and treatments that will and will not be paid for !
There is far wider opposition to the mandate that abortifacients be covered than there is opposition to the mandate that birth control be covered. Many religious denominations that are perfectly fine with birth control staunchly oppose abortion. So it's okay for the government to insist that religious employers participate in something that they find morally repugnant, yet the idea of sterilization is abhorrent to you. Well, welcome to their shoes....maybe you learned a little bit about empathy, eh?
Yes, once we fix your post, you nailed it! The purpose of satire is to take something stupid another person said, and exaggerate it, in order to amplify just how stupid the original statement was. You knew that, right?
As an aside, I just realized elsewhere how ridiculous some of this sounds when you put it into context. Lots of dental plans don't cover orthodontia, yet there was not a single kid with crooked teeth at the convention or testifying before Congress. Lots of health plans restrict chiropractic coverage, yet I haven't heard a single voice speak about how outrageously this omission makes victims out of people with scoliosis. From all accounts, Sandra Fluke has a pretty decent health plan, and like most health plans, there are various limits on coverage. Lots of people want their conditions covered more fully than they are. Even under PPACA there are limits on coverage, you still have to pay for aspirin and there are plenty of co-pays and deductibles and lists of drugs and treatments that will and will not be paid for !
There is far wider opposition to the mandate that abortifacients be covered than there is opposition to the mandate that birth control be covered. Many religious denominations that are perfectly fine with birth control staunchly oppose abortion. So it's okay for the government to insist that religious employers participate in something that they find morally repugnant, yet the idea of sterilization is abhorrent to you. Well, welcome to their shoes....maybe you learned a little bit about empathy, eh?
Last edited:
unofan
Well-known member
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
If women above the age of majorty want to choose that, isn't that the free market at work? Afterall, I can probably get my vasectomy covered by insurance if I decide to get one.
Or you somehow moving the goalposts yet again and somehow claiming that we're advocating forced sterilzation? I mean, comeon, we're not even advocating forced birth control. Merely that it should be an option covered by insurance.
If women above the age of majorty want to choose that, isn't that the free market at work? Afterall, I can probably get my vasectomy covered by insurance if I decide to get one.
Or you somehow moving the goalposts yet again and somehow claiming that we're advocating forced sterilzation? I mean, comeon, we're not even advocating forced birth control. Merely that it should be an option covered by insurance.
FadeToBlack&Gold
8647
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
I didn't see anything indicating saracsm, snark, etc. in there. A simple wink would've done, but I realize that some of the conservatives on this board don't consider that acceptable, so...
Also, I have never expressed support for mandating religious organizations to provide abortifacient methods or drugs. You should not assume support for the opposition based on pointing out ridiculous statements.
I didn't see anything indicating saracsm, snark, etc. in there. A simple wink would've done, but I realize that some of the conservatives on this board don't consider that acceptable, so...
Also, I have never expressed support for mandating religious organizations to provide abortifacient methods or drugs. You should not assume support for the opposition based on pointing out ridiculous statements.
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
If that were all you were advocating, then this conversation would have been over a real long time ago. As an employer, I want birth control coverage in my health plan because dealing with maternity leave and FMLA reporting is a hassle and it costs money, and two things I don't need at work are more hassle and more costs!
Perhaps I confused you with someone else? If so, then I apologize profusely. I thought I was responding to people who were in favor of the HHS mandate.
Many organizations that are fine with birth control are appalled by abortion. Set aside however you personally feel about that subject, and grant that their motivation is genuinely moral. The HHS mandate requires that all covered employers must offer abortifacients as part of their health plan. Hence my use of sterilization as a rhetorical device: the revulsion most of us rightly feel at that idea also is felt equally deeply by some people about being forced to participate in what they consider to be infanticide.
Huge difference. As a private employer, I like offering birth control; as an American I generally don't like government forcing people to act against their moral code.
If that were all you were advocating, then this conversation would have been over a real long time ago. As an employer, I want birth control coverage in my health plan because dealing with maternity leave and FMLA reporting is a hassle and it costs money, and two things I don't need at work are more hassle and more costs!
Perhaps I confused you with someone else? If so, then I apologize profusely. I thought I was responding to people who were in favor of the HHS mandate.
Many organizations that are fine with birth control are appalled by abortion. Set aside however you personally feel about that subject, and grant that their motivation is genuinely moral. The HHS mandate requires that all covered employers must offer abortifacients as part of their health plan. Hence my use of sterilization as a rhetorical device: the revulsion most of us rightly feel at that idea also is felt equally deeply by some people about being forced to participate in what they consider to be infanticide.
Huge difference. As a private employer, I like offering birth control; as an American I generally don't like government forcing people to act against their moral code.
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
You are absolutely right in that I have no reason to link you personally with support for the HHS mandate. However, this thread is about the convention and that's one of the main reasons they had Sandra Fluke speaking, to soften the perception of the mandate by trying to turn it into something else.
and as for not giving any hint of sarcasm, wow! that just floors me! the idea is so outrageous that no one could ever believe it was actually proposed as a serious course of action, right?
hmm...well, maybe not. I forgot about the lesson of Jonathan Swift and A Modest Proposal. Back when England ruled Ireland, there was debate in Parliament about what to do with the Irish population, it was growing faster than the resources available to feed it (given the way the English used Ireland as a plantation in which half the produce was shipped out of the country by the English landlords, making it unavailable for the indigenous Irish to eat....). Anyway, Swift suggested that Irish babies be turned into snacks and suggested various ways to cook and serve them.
I didn't see anything indicating saracsm, snark, etc. in there. A simple wink would've done, but I realize that some of the conservatives on this board don't consider that acceptable, so...
Also, I have never expressed support for mandating religious organizations to provide abortifacient methods or drugs. You should not assume support for the opposition based on pointing out ridiculous statements.
You are absolutely right in that I have no reason to link you personally with support for the HHS mandate. However, this thread is about the convention and that's one of the main reasons they had Sandra Fluke speaking, to soften the perception of the mandate by trying to turn it into something else.
and as for not giving any hint of sarcasm, wow! that just floors me! the idea is so outrageous that no one could ever believe it was actually proposed as a serious course of action, right?
hmm...well, maybe not. I forgot about the lesson of Jonathan Swift and A Modest Proposal. Back when England ruled Ireland, there was debate in Parliament about what to do with the Irish population, it was growing faster than the resources available to feed it (given the way the English used Ireland as a plantation in which half the produce was shipped out of the country by the English landlords, making it unavailable for the indigenous Irish to eat....). Anyway, Swift suggested that Irish babies be turned into snacks and suggested various ways to cook and serve them.
unofan
Well-known member
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Same person, but those are two different arguments.
I disagree with your assertion that requiring all health insurers to cover birth control impacts anyone's religious morals. Such a mandate does not require one to use that particular feature of their health plan, and surely the truly religious will not. But requiring that option be available to the janitor who isn't a Catholic no more impacts the priest's freedom of religion than a Quaker's religious freedom is impacted by paying taxes to support a war he is morally opposed to, or a christian scientist being forced to subsidize blood transfusions for others. We all indirectly support causes we find reprehensible. It's called living in an open society.
Same person, but those are two different arguments.
I disagree with your assertion that requiring all health insurers to cover birth control impacts anyone's religious morals. Such a mandate does not require one to use that particular feature of their health plan, and surely the truly religious will not. But requiring that option be available to the janitor who isn't a Catholic no more impacts the priest's freedom of religion than a Quaker's religious freedom is impacted by paying taxes to support a war he is morally opposed to, or a christian scientist being forced to subsidize blood transfusions for others. We all indirectly support causes we find reprehensible. It's called living in an open society.
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
How, by importing babies to maintain the population and workforce? C'mon guy, do you even try to think things through to their conclusions before you have an emotional outburst that the rest of us have to put up with?
How, by importing babies to maintain the population and workforce? C'mon guy, do you even try to think things through to their conclusions before you have an emotional outburst that the rest of us have to put up with?
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
If you require me to pay for someone else to perform what I consider to be infanticide? just because they don't feel that way doesn't change my morals. We're back at forced sterilization again. and I had hoped you'd be logical not emotional. oh well. you can't reason with emotion, by definition.
If you require me to pay for someone else to perform what I consider to be infanticide? just because they don't feel that way doesn't change my morals. We're back at forced sterilization again. and I had hoped you'd be logical not emotional. oh well. you can't reason with emotion, by definition.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
I believe at least one of the current folks who posts laughable righty tirades is actually trolling the knucks, Colbert-style.
unofan
Well-known member
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
We require Quakers to pay for what they consider murder. Christian Scientists and Jehovah's Witnesses must pay for other people's blood transfusions even though they consider such procedures as defiling the human temple. The only difference is this one conflicts with your religion.
And again, no one is forcing anyone to use it, so your comparison with forced sterilization completely misses the mark.
We require Quakers to pay for what they consider murder. Christian Scientists and Jehovah's Witnesses must pay for other people's blood transfusions even though they consider such procedures as defiling the human temple. The only difference is this one conflicts with your religion.
And again, no one is forcing anyone to use it, so your comparison with forced sterilization completely misses the mark.
G
Gurtholfin
Guest
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Fish - did you claim to be a liberal? Am I remembering that wrong?
Fish - did you claim to be a liberal? Am I remembering that wrong?
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!
Take the presidential election quiz and see which candidate you side with!
fwiw of course
Take the presidential election quiz and see which candidate you side with!
fwiw of course