Thank you Massachusetts!

I didn't mean it quite that way, WTF. My apologies to Rudy if it comes across as though I'm harshin' on him.

. Originally Posted by Sisyphus

He is a big boy. Sooner he learns that his po-etic wax on life is just as amusing to some is theirs is to him. Sooner we can forget all this political crap and figure out why, we'd rather play golf than screw some beauty with big ole hooters. Didn't use to be that way you know! Love used to mean never having to say you're sorry.!

I didn't mean it quite that way, WTF. My apologies to Rudy if it comes across as though I'm harshin' on him.

It just struck me as a really funny thing to say in the midst of a convo that is essentially about interpreting elections in a representative form of government.

In any form of government, others can & do speak for me all day every day. I may not like who picked 'em...gol...I can be a real self-loathing bastard after a few too many! I may not like how they got picked. I sure as hell may not like what they say in my name. But, it happens. Originally Posted by Sisyphus

I guess it is just a choice of words. I didn't pose the "speak for me" words intitially (I believe it was some mouthy guy from down south...).

So no, I don't believe anyone speaks for me. But I do recognize that I have people who do represent me...sometimes to my chagrin. There is a difference. If that's what you all mean by "speak for me", it might be better to be more clear. Clarity in communication causes less problems.

The most efficient form of government is a monarchy...and I am all for it...as long as I am the monarch. Sadly, I have trouble getting others to go along with that.

I guess it is just a choice of words. I didn't pose the "speak for me" words intitially (I believe it was some mouthy guy from down south...).

So no, I don't believe anyone speaks for me. But I do recognize that I have people who do represent me...sometimes to my chagrin. There is a difference. If that's what you all mean by "speak for me", it might be better to be more clear. Clarity in communication causes less problems. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

I can't find the quote so I don't know to give the props to... but I absolutely agree that,

"Precision in language leads to precision in thought."

"...[I] all..." didn't mean nuthin' by "...speak for me..." as I had no DOGmatic in the hunt by that point. No one speaks for me, either!!

Following along with the convo as best I could, I found it humorous in the manner previously alluded to. That's all.

The most efficient form of government is a monarchy...and I am all for it...as long as I am the monarch. Sadly, I have trouble getting others to go along with that. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Hmmnnn....being ruled by one who really has no concern or care for me.... it does have some appeal! Do you charge extra for that????

The most efficient form of government is a monarchy...and I am all for it...as long as I am the monarch. Sadly, I have trouble getting others to go along with that. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

I prefer benevolent despots. Monarchy is hereditary and there is no way to know that my progeny would be as benevolent as I am

being ruled by one who really has no concern or care for me.... it does have some appeal! Originally Posted by Sisyphus

Oh, you have misread me Sys. I have concern and I do care for ya. Probably just not as much as you do though.

..despite what PJ thinks Mass residents are fairly happy with the healthcare system Mitt Romney put into place. Originally Posted by WTF

Not so much: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...form_a_success

And the costs are just beginning to explode.

I guess it is just a choice of words. I didn't pose the "speak for me" words intitially (I believe it was some mouthy guy from down south...).
Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Dat be me folks!

Olivia, Mass. does not speak for me! Originally Posted by WTF

HollyMollie, I just said a Senator from Mass. does not speak fo me on healthcare.


To recap, RK made a point, Olivia cheered it, I counterpointed it, RK said something or other, I made a dumb ass remark about a mayoral election in Houston and walked right into one, RK invites me to pat his ass, not my type, RK then has trouble finding my point, I told him again he wasn't my type but that it did not appear he was looking to hard(thank God) There, I hope that cleared up any confusion with my precise recap

I

"Precision in language leads to precision in thought."

k: Originally Posted by Sisyphus

All that and ain't not one single mind been changed! Ans thinks it funny, I should have known better ... just waiting on Nicollet B to tell me how great Putin is, again.

Not so much: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...form_a_success

And the costs are just beginning to explode. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Counterpoint


http://globalwarmingmisinformation.c...h/201001220004

Brown campaigned against federal health reform by pointing to success of coverage expansions Massachusetts already achieved

Whadda ya know??? Hell really is OTHER people! If you ever tire of the current handle, I'm guessing "Jean-Paul Sartre" is still available! Originally Posted by Sisyphus

Are we allowed to do that here? That is change names/have multiple accts? That was like a big no no in the old clubhouse

Counterpoint


http://globalwarmingmisinformation.c...h/201001220004

Brown campaigned against federal health reform by pointing to success of coverage expansions Massachusetts already achieved Originally Posted by WTF

Like a poll by Harvard and the Boston Globe is unbiased? Right!

Like a poll by Harvard and the Boston Globe is unbiased? Right! Originally Posted by pjorourke

bout as biased as my recap!

"In another question, residents were nearly evenly split over whether Massachusetts could afford to continue with the law as it stands: 43 percent said the state could not, and 40 percent said it could." (Boston Globe Article, 9.28.09)

The problem is this:
In theory, all plans sound great.
In reality, most plans suck.

"In another question, residents were nearly evenly split over whether Massachusetts could afford to continue with the law as it stands: 43 percent said the state could not, and 40 percent said it could." (Boston Globe Article, 9.28.09)

The problem is this:
In theory, all plans sound great.
In reality, most plans suck. Originally Posted by Fuggum

Here's another nice quote, since we are cherry picking and dissing sources.



''The poll found that 79 percent of those surveyed wanted the law to continue, though a majority said there should be some changes, with cost reductions cited as the single most important change that needs to be made.''

I would just like to say that I wish the media would show us the bodies of all those poor poor people that have died because they have no health care. Anyone that can get to a hospital in this country is supposed to be seen and treated.

The next issue on health care is that many people could afford insurance, but choose not buy it.

Yes we have problems with health care in the US, mostly caused by people in our legal system, so don't look for the government to take on that task. Had we put together a panel of 100 of the smartest people from the ranks of doctors and businessmen we could probably fix our system. However, that is not what we did! We put together a group of 100 elected jackasses that no longer represent those who voted them into office. A group of men and women that in their mind believe they are now our royals.

One last point for someone on the left to PLEASE explain to me. If this bill would have saved lives and made our system better whydid most of it not go into effect until after the next election, and why did congress make themselves, their staff's and families exempt from being in the system?

Just saw this thread and must thank Massachusetts also! Now to get Arlen Sphincter out of PA!!