Don't be foolish. My hatred regards ignorance, not the specific source of ignorance. Saying people watch too much Fox news is really just offering an excuse for the ignorance.
Can you point out this "hatred"? Pointing out bias is not "hatred". You on the other hand seem to have gone from zero to raging But it's only FOX right? Not the misinformation and bias from other outlets? That's why you guys are funny
It is only ignorance, regardless of source. So Fox isn't your source of ignorance, fine. Where do you get your bad data?
No Fox news has a HATRED for our President, just like a LOT of Republicans. They Hate the man and will do ANYTHING to bash him and make him look bad. A Majority (You do know what a Majority is Right?) people elected him and people like you cannot deal with it. You turn to Fox news to fuel your hatred. Which is fine with me. There is a LOT more of us than there are of you.
On the other hand, it seems pretty reasonable to complain now that we have no choice but to pay. Either we pay them, or the money gets straight up stolen from us by the IRS. Not complaining about that is what seems silly.
What bad data? The fact that you guys get enraged over FOX's existence...I get it from threads just like this one.
The smilie's here now, so 14th's pulled his head out of his ass? (btw, 14th, I'm sure there's a fetish for people able to ram their heads up their arse. You could get rich!)
They're just being supportive of his own efforts to make himself look like a bumbling villain. Competition is fierce, though, as he seems to outdo himself week after week.
I don't agree with everything he does either, But damn when Bush was President they sucked his dick every night
You guys have it wrong. It's the "nobodies" who keep repeating "We don't know what's in it." The rest of us have been providing you with the information for almost four years. Deliberate ignorance is its own reward.
There is no page 1,217. Pick another: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590enr/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590enr.pdf Or take advantage of the numerous links presented by several of us over the past 3.7 years. Or ask an intelligent question and one of us will answer it...again.
Fine. Here's an intelligent question: How is forcing someone to pay for something they don't want moral?
It isn't. And we can talk about the difference between moral and legal some other time. For now, I'd like whatever of my tax money went into the preemptive invasion of Iraq returned, thank you. When you've done that, we can talk about people who could have afforded health insurance but refused to get it, then ran up tens of thousands of dollars in ER services that got passed on to the rest of us. We can do an endless riff on why you're willing to pay more taxes so that megacorporations can pay less, but let's not do that here. Okay? Now, do you have a question about the ACA, or are you just grandstanding as usual?
No, let's talk about that right now. The Tenth Amendment says that nothing except what the Constitution spells out is anything they can do. So it's neither moral nor legal for them to impose a mandate as regards to any commercial purchase. So they're WRONG. They're wrong legally, they're wrong morally,, they're wrong in every way it's possible for them to be wrong. They... are fucking... wrong. They can't even get right from where they are. They'd have to throw all their shit out and start over, in order to get to right. Now, you had a point, I assume? Please tell me it's something more interesting than just "Obehhhhhhy! Obehhhhhhhhhhy!" Science fiction authors aren't supposed to be brainless conformists, so come on.
That you propose to legislate morality, and you have to censor other people's words in order to do so? Okay, Poodle.
I'm not a legislator, so I'm not legislating morality. If by "legislate morality" you mean that I'm pointing out things that are fucking immoral, you bet your bicentennial biscuits I am. Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed how the most radically immoral people are always the ones who scream and throw tantrums about anyone else bringing morality into a discussion? "You really shouldn't be lighting puppies on fire." "AAAAAA STOP TRYING TO LEGISLATE MORALITEEEEEEEEEEE!!! BRING ME MORE PUPPIES!!!" Well, y'know what? Screw you. Better than two thirds of the problems we're dealing with today are the result of people being browbeaten -- and just plain beaten -- away from morality. And morality doesn't come from religion; it never did. It comes from a personal understanding of what really helps people and what really hurts people. Well, ya know what really helps people, more than anything else? Freedom. Know what hurts people, more than anything else? Dependence. We see where you are on that question. You're just wasting your time by playing it any other way.
And I'm sure you have an objective definition for both of those words that consistently applies to all your blubberings about "socialism", and, will in turn make your definition of that word consistent with itself. Yep, I'm sure that's all coming along any minute now. *Insert Tom Petty's "the waiting"*