Lie of the Year: 'A government takeover of health care'

• I Wear Pants

  BGFalcons82;619404 wrote:"Oh and by the way, I cannot recall any radical Christian groups beheading anyone of late nor have they hijacked airliners full of innocent people and crashing them into skyscrapers full of innocent people...but I digress."
  
  I'm sorry...are the Crusades terrorizing anyone O F L A T E ?????
  
  Now admit your mistake, bigdogg. Or would you like to continue this pissing match?

  Well I mean I did provide a bunch of examples.
• Bigdogg

  I Wear Pants;619453 wrote:Well I mean I did provide a bunch of examples.

  
  He is a jackass so why bother.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  Bigdogg;619607 wrote:He is a jackass so why bother.

  Name calling.
  
  Really?
• believer

  

  CenterBHSFan;619611 wrote:Name calling.
  
  Really?

  One of Bigdogg's best tactics.
• I Wear Pants

  Bigdogg;619607 wrote:He is a jackass so why bother.

  
  BG isn't a jackass.
• HitsRus

  

  way off topic here guys....
  
  
  getting back to the title....
  bigdogg wrote:

  You Constitutionalists people kill me. Do you really believe that our for fathers really thought the Bill of Rights would cover everything that this County will ever need?
  
  Look up Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act

  yeah...an unfunded mandate that you are now using to justify and even more egregious interference of government into healthcare.
  You liberal people kill me.
• Bigdogg

  HitsRus;619895 wrote:way off topic here guys....
  
  
  getting back to the title....
  bigdogg wrote:
  
  
  yeah...an unfunded mandate that you are now using to justify and even more egregious interference of government into healthcare.
  You liberal people kill me.

  
  Funny that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act was passed in 1986 by the 99th Congress. No other then your hero Ronald Wilson Reagan, POTUS, and Senate Majority leader Bob Dole. I really consider myself a moderate Republican with common sense but I really don't care what you call, My feeling don't get hurt
• Bigdogg

  I Wear Pants;619657 wrote:BG isn't a jackass.

  
  I thought he was a Democrat, pardon my mistake
• HitsRus

  

  Funny that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act was passed in 1986 by the 99th Congress. No other then your hero Ronald Wilson Reagan, POTUS, and Senate Majority leader Bob Dole. I really consider myself a moderate Republican with common sense but I really don't care what you call, My feeling don't get hurt

  I don't mind that act in and of itself, ...only that it shows how one inch leads to one mile. I don't care what you consider yourself, your posts say it all.
• Bigdogg

  HitsRus;620555 wrote:I don't mind that act in and of itself, ...only that it shows how one inch leads to one mile. I don't care what you consider yourself, your posts say it all.

  
  Thank you.
• HitsRus

  

  Don't mention it.
  
  It was my duty to point out such a flawed justification.
• Bigdogg

  HitsRus;620858 wrote:Don't mention it.
  
  It was my duty to point out such a flawed justification.

  Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one.
• HitsRus

  

  Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one.

  Everyone has a brain, too. What we have to make sure of is that we are using them for what they were made for.
• Bigdogg

  HitsRus;621037 wrote:Everyone has a brain, too. What we have to make sure of is that we are using them for what they were made for.

  
  So lets review. BG wants examples of Christians committing violence against people. Several examples are provided. You incorrectly claim liberals are responsible for all "egregious interference of government" health care polices. I agree with your assessment that not everyone uses their brain for what they are made for
• BGFalcons82

  

  Sorry, IWP, that it took me some time to respond. I had to take the time to think clearly instead of engaging in a pissing contest.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord%27s_Resistance_Army - I've read about the LRA before. I find it interesting that their exploits are not a part of everyday media stories. If they are as evil as your Wikileaks story suggests, then I'm astonished their murder and mayhem aren't a part of the daily news. My take on them is that they aren't religious based, but engaged in a civil war in Uganda of all places. Hasn't that country been in civil war for a century or so? Matter of fact, their only claim to religion that I read is their adherence to The 10 Commandments, which appear in the Old Testament and Judaism. Back to the original post by Believer....he said, ".. I cannot recall any radical Christian groups beheading anyone of late.." It may be a technical point, but if there have been televised beheadings by LRA, please post a link and I'll retract. I looked for some stories on Google and only found stories on the Ugandan civil war, not on Christian terrorists.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism - Nope, no stories on Christian beheadings of late in this link that I found.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutaree - Fortunately this group got grounded before they killed people. You mentioned they flew a plane into an IRS building. Didn't see that in this link. No beheadings either.
  
  http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=10603010 - A Molotov cocktail thrown into a dope shop? Didn't read the word, "Christian" in the story and no beheadings.
  
  Your last link, which I can't copy and paste as my screen keeps scrolling uncontrollably, is a listing of murders and I'm not going to read all of them. Is there one about beheadings or flying planes into buildings in the name of Jesus? If there is, I'll read that story.
  
  In summary, the only link you posted which has any relevance is the LRA out of Uganda. I'm not certain they are a terrorist organization as much as a warring party attempting to become the next set of dictators to be toppled in the near future. Didn't see any stories of beheadings, nor would I classify them as a Christian organization as Christ in not referenced. I did enjoy the research however, and I learned a couple things, which is always good, eh?
  
  Oh...thanks for not piling on with the jackass insults. I do get sideways sometimes, but I try not to get into the gutter.
• I Wear Pants

  See, you claim they aren't Christian groups. Just like people say that despite them saying they are Muslim, Al-Qaeda and the like aren't actually Muslim groups.
  
  The point is, you're making the distinction of how different groups murder innocent people.
  
  Is beheading a journalist in Iraq or somewhere really that much different than murdering an abortion doctor?
  
  Sure, I'll give you that the violence in the Mid-East is much more common but then you're talking about a completely different set of circumstances. Someone is going to say I'm a terrorist sympathizer because of this but I'd attribute a lot of what goes on over there to the environment people are in. Not all of it certainly but I'm simply not of the opinion that the violence and depravity over there is all because of what religion they are in. In different times and places every religion has been the leader as far as horrible attrocities go.
  
  And it wouldn't make sense to call you a jackass. You disagree with me on the internet about politics and you manage to do so without insulting or directly attacking me (even though I may sometimes not be able to do the same). That's about as far away from being a jackass as you can get.
• BGFalcons82

  

  IWP - OK, this is my last post on this subject. Believer made a post that I saw no errors within...and stated so. In his post (and anyone can go back and look at it), he claimed no Christians are flying planes into buildings nor beheading anyone of late. This is what I agreed with. It didn't say there wasn't death, it didn't say there wasn't civil war, it didn't say many things that have driven this into a pissing match. I'm done with making any more comments about it. Technically, I stand by my post, but what does it matter in the grand scheme of things? I spent a half hour today reading about shit I didn't know about and that was educational. Other than that....adios to this subject.
  
  If anyone wants to continue to flop out johnsons and whiz away, have at it and I'll let believer answer ya.
• believer

  

  BGFalcons82;622181 wrote:If anyone wants to continue to flop out johnsons and whiz away, have at it and I'll let believer answer ya.

  Naw...I'm tired of trying to figure out the liberal mindset.
• I Wear Pants

  BGFalcons82;622181 wrote:IWP - OK, this is my last post on this subject. Believer made a post that I saw no errors within...and stated so. In his post (and anyone can go back and look at it), he claimed no Christians are flying planes into buildings nor beheading anyone of late. This is what I agreed with. It didn't say there wasn't death, it didn't say there wasn't civil war, it didn't say many things that have driven this into a pissing match. I'm done with making any more comments about it. Technically, I stand by my post, but what does it matter in the grand scheme of things? I spent a half hour today reading about shit I didn't know about and that was educational. Other than that....adios to this subject.
  
  If anyone wants to continue to flop out johnsons and whiz away, have at it and I'll let believer answer ya.

  Fine by me. I wasn't trying to challenge that Christians haven't of late been beheading people and flying planes into buildings (IRS guy we'll leave out of this). What I was trying to demonstrate is that it doesn't matter that they aren't doing those two specific things as there are "Christians" (in quotes because they're obviously not actually living that way) doing terrible things that don't involve planes or beheadings (this isn't limited to Christians but includes Muslims, etc).
  
  I just didn't understand why beheadings and flying planes into buildings is somehow more evil than dismembering 50 people in a church or any of the other atrocities that go on. Maybe I read into it wrong but I sensed that Believer or whomever I was first responding to somehow believed that Muslim extremists have a monopoly on terrorism and hideous deeds. If I incorrectly assumed that I apologize for the several pages of arguments we've just had unnecessarily.
• Bigdogg

  I Wear Pants;622409 wrote:Fine by me. I wasn't trying to challenge that Christians haven't of late been beheading people and flying planes into buildings (IRS guy we'll leave out of this). What I was trying to demonstrate is that it doesn't matter that they aren't doing those two specific things as there are "Christians" (in quotes because they're obviously not actually living that way) doing terrible things that don't involve planes or beheadings (this isn't limited to Christians but includes Muslims, etc).
  
  I just didn't understand why beheadings and flying planes into buildings is somehow more evil than dismembering 50 people in a church or any of the other atrocities that go on. Maybe I read into it wrong but I sensed that Believer or whomever I was first responding to somehow believed that Muslim extremists have a monopoly on terrorism and hideous deeds. If I incorrectly assumed that I apologize for the several pages of arguments we've just had unnecessarily.

  
  Or why we want to distinguish things that happen recently is any different then things that have happened in the past.
• I Wear Pants

  Well I mean, the Crusades aren't really relevant right now. At least not as far as me, BG, and Believer were arguing.
  
  Not that they should be forgotten but they don't really hold water as far as "shit Christian extremists are doing that is bad".
• majorspark

  

  History teaches us this:
  
  When misguided elements of any religious or radical belief get control of the reigns of the state that is when they are to be feared the most. Attach any label you want, so called Christians, Jews, Muslims, Shintos, Buddhists, and yes atheists, all have blood on their hands at some point in history. It is only when these elements use it to get their hands on large amounts of government power that they are able to reign true long term terror on their fellow man. Be it the muslim conquests or catholic crusades in the early centuries. Or modern day manifestations of these, the main issue is access and control of government power. Mainly central control.
  
  In recent times the Japanese used some elements of the Shinto religion combined with a national entitlement to economic resources of other states for the just good of the empire and its emperor, who was looked at as a god himself. The reigns of the government of Japan were seized by such elements. Japanese Kamikaze pilots make today's crop of suicide bombers look like amateurs.
  
  Catholic and so called Christian religious beliefs were a part of the NAZI regime as well. The Jews were a detriment the the economic well being of the state and they killed Christ therefore anything was "morally" justified when dealing with them.
  
  Then we have the atheist regime of the Soviet Union. Headed by the evil nutbag Stalin. His regime reigned more terror on its citizens and by most historical accounts used governmental authority to kill more innocents than Adolph Hitler. Yet he was our ally. You can see pictures of Stalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt yucking it up a Yalta. I can understand why General Patton and others wanted to use force to move them out of Eastern Europe.
• majorspark

  

  One lesson learned from 9/11 is that a small group not "officially" aligned with a state can inflict significant damage and kill large amounts of people. Future attacks of this nature must be stopped. They still needed however a nation to train and propagate their attacks from. And defend them if necessary. That nation was Afghanistan.
  
  Afghanistan allowed training for those responsible and after the fact by the power of their state provided sanctuary and protection for those responsible, despite our calls for them to turn over the guilty, they refused. With congressional approval we should have declared war against the state of Afghanistan and the president should have warned any nation that interferes that they could risk the same. We should at that point have unleashed unlimited war against the nation of Afghanistan. Unleash hell on them. Any nation that allowed the perpetrators to flee onto their sovereign land and provide them sanctuary would be asking for war with the USA and their wish would be granted.
  
  It should have been made clear to the Pakistanis, we will pursue those responsible into your lands if necessary and if you oppose us we will see you as at war with us. We will defeat you and leave you so weak the Indians will pick you clean and you will be subject to their domination for decades. Ditto Iran, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan. Don't protect these nuts. Turn them over and their will be peace between us. Give them sanctuary and risk war.
• I Wear Pants

  So anywhere we think Al-Qaeda is we have the right to invade?
  
  (No, you didn't say that, I'm merely asking if that's your opinion)
• majorspark

  

  Our federal government was designed to prevent central control of governance from falling into the hands of the nefarious few who seek to control the masses for whatever reason they deem a just cause. Even if that cause be health care.
  
  The founders divided the power to decide these things between state authorities and the federal government. They divided the federal authority that rules over them into three branches. These divisions of power are the best attempt they could muster to prevent nutbags from gaining central power. Nutbags that seek power over the masses are out there. But to this day the founders system of governance has largely held them off. Though I would argue they have made many gains in last hundred years.