Posts by i_robot73

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Trump rips NFL commissioner for 'trying to justify' players' 'disrespect' for country

    09/24/2017 2:58:53 PM PDT · 152 of 155
    i_robot73 to Enchante; All

    Oh, I’m sure the same are/were quick to write the check back for the taxpayer % of their little playground-fiefdoms, right??

    Has ANY city brought up any funding termination plans? The Anthem isn’t just ‘here’ or ‘there’, but the whole of country. Don’t like it, sure, you can kneel...but don’t expect the 1/2+ you just ‘dissed’ to pony up for your stunt\ideals.

  • Is Rand Paul Smart Enough To Become A Hero?

    09/24/2017 8:48:27 AM PDT · 6 of 29
    i_robot73 to JohnBrowdie

    >
    By casting that single vote, Rand Paul could become a hero to President Trump’s voter base who rejected him resoundingly in the primaries. don’t think that he’s gotten over that.
    >

    We’re not talking McStain here, so what indication might have YOU seen to indicate ‘no gotten over’ status?

  • U.S. Jeff Sessions' New Chief Of Staff: Mueller's Russia Probe Could Be A 'Witch Hunt'

    09/23/2017 12:33:04 PM PDT · 53 of 55
    i_robot73 to Hugin; nhwingut

    Something like ‘The Bucks Stops Here’??

    He’s not doing his job, then FIRE his ass and get in someone willing to FOLLOW THE LAW and PROSECUTE THE LAWBREAKERS.

  • U.S. Jeff Sessions' New Chief Of Staff: Mueller's Russia Probe Could Be A 'Witch Hunt'

    09/23/2017 12:17:22 PM PDT · 52 of 55
    i_robot73 to Starboard; Leep

    >Republicans talk a lot....and do very little.

    Oh, I disagree.

    (R) talk a lot and allow the (D) to do quite a bit of damage every year.

    The ‘conservatives’ and the (R) base do very little (just look at the Session apologists here, the knee-pad brigade, and those pushing the sh!t sandwich of O’Care repeal [’cuz 1/2 sandwich is Ummmm, ummm better than nothing]).

  • Graham-Cassidy Strips Away The Few Concessions GOP Moderates Already Won

    09/23/2017 12:09:36 PM PDT · 37 of 37
    i_robot73 to xzins

    >Those who insist on their own way in this argument will get ObamaCare.

    Own way? Constitutional. Whom knew that was just ‘my’ way....What way does the (C) support then?

    >Preventing change means we keep Obamacare.

    Preventing change != repeal. Those that want to re-arrange the deck-chairs on the Titanic means we keep O’Care.

    But keep pulling that (R) lever. I’m sure they’ll finally get the OTHER 1/2 of the loaf for *SOMETHING*, someday.

  • Graham-Cassidy Strips Away The Few Concessions GOP Moderates Already Won

    09/23/2017 12:01:42 PM PDT · 36 of 37
    i_robot73 to rb22982

    >
    but the legislature can’t overrule what the USSC ruled a few years ago. Maybe if Trump gets another USSC justice we can revisit it legally.
    >

    Incorrect and YES, they can. They DON’T. WANT. TO.

    >
    2) Graham-Cassidy - eliminates the mandates, eliminates the medicaid expansion, removes a lot of the regulations, keeps the taxes to fund block grants to allow 50 states to experiment with what works best.

    Option 3 - full repeal - you could probably force through in the house but 0.0% chance of getting it through the Senate. #2 isn’t perfect but it is MUCH, much better than #1. After 9/30, you’ll need 60 votes and if anything you are more likely to have ACA expanded if a bi-partisan bill comes to the floor.
    >

    “Well, it’s only PARTIAL slavery...We’ll press for Freedom NEXT year....”

    Yep. Another 1/2-loaf theory w/ no prior examples (how’s the Reagan amnesty ‘deal’ working out so far? When’s the other 1/2 of THAT coming through [the Contract w/ Amer. exists how/where anymore???])

    (R) lost the debate already (never fought it, actually). You’re debating using the Leftist talking points anyway.

  • Graham-Cassidy Strips Away The Few Concessions GOP Moderates Already Won

    09/23/2017 11:55:27 AM PDT · 35 of 37
    i_robot73 to JayGalt

    >
    You have to stop letting your anger cloud your brain. This bill has an end to Federal block grants in 2026
    >

    BWAhahahahaha. Is that like the 10+yr ‘balanced budget(s)’?? It’s another 180 on Federalism and another (few) step(s) away from the ONLY legal/proper course: FULL *REPEAL*.

    >
    Most of the power to control how healthcare $ are spent goes to the States in 2020. The States have many ways to opt out of mandates under this bill and once 2026 comes that topic is irrelevant.
    >

    Wow! So Fedzilla will ‘graciously’ cede (illegal/unconstitutional) control back to the States....where it’s just as illegal/unconstitutional?

    Shit! Where do I sign-up!?

    >
    Have you actually read the bill?
    >

    Unless it contains ONE page w/ one paragraph w/ the phrase “O’Care” + “repealed” why should I need to read the bill when it doesn’t solve un-growing Fedzilla and restoring the LAWFUL/rightful size and scope of the same?

  • The Elephant in the Blue Room

    09/23/2017 11:49:03 AM PDT · 3 of 3
    i_robot73 to Kaslin

    Banana-Republic problems. All moot *IF* the Constitution were still adhered and followed.

    Add in a Fascist uniparty head-fast into Socialism (while wearing the flag lapel pin and taking a oath they break soon thereafter).

  • Graham-Cassidy Strips Away The Few Concessions GOP Moderates Already Won

    09/22/2017 5:44:51 AM PDT · 8 of 37
    i_robot73 to xzins; cotton1706; P-Marlowe; Jim Robinson

    >
    At this point a vote against change is a vote for ObamaCare. There is no other way to look at it. Principles is the excuse that we are given. The principled people want pure 100% their own way. The reality is that our system of government is not constructed that way. The whole point of a legislature is that the legislators will trade and compromise.

    I am now inclined to think that any Senator or representative who votes against change because of their principles, is actually a secret supporter of Obamacare. Because the only result that will come from their opposition is that Obamacare will remain the law of the land.

    At least with this change, we have the real possibility of making it better incremental step by incremental step on into the future. Keep Obamacare, and like Bernie Sanders is pushing, the only result will be Single Payer like Canada where you wait 6 months for heart problems to see a doctor. And that is only if you are young enough and healthy enough for their death panel to decide that you are worthy of their care. Otherwise, they let you die with something that gets fixed easily in our Great American Medical system.
    >

    Pure horse-shit.

    Principled = LEGAL/Constitutional. Just admit you’re happy w/ the opposite.

    As for the 1/2-loaf fallacy: How’s that working w/ illegal aliens (Reagan’s folly)?? When’s the other 1/2 come into play?

    The only “incremental step” is more and more govt control at the cost of our Rights (which this bill would do vs. States). The whole idea of ‘paying’ Fedzilla to give BACK to the State(s) is asinine on its face).

  • Dem Senator: The Cassidy-Graham Bill Is Awful. Also I Haven't Read it.

    09/22/2017 5:18:10 AM PDT · 6 of 15
    i_robot73 to Kaslin

    That’s OK, those that sponsor the bill haven’t written nor read it either

  • Executive Order that Could Cause Millions to Self-Deport

    09/21/2017 10:25:44 AM PDT · 111 of 111
    i_robot73 to Tammy8; All

    >
    We have had some sort of assistance to the poor since the colonies, that is never going away.

    “The history of welfare in the U.S. started long before the government welfare programs we know were created. In the early days of the United States, the colonies imported the British Poor Laws. These laws made a distinction between those who were unable to work due to their age or physical health and those who were able-bodied but unemployed. The former group was assisted with cash or alternative forms of help from the government. The latter group was given public service employment in workhouses.”

    http://www.welfareinfo.org/history/
    >

    I care not for ‘what we had’, we were not the Republic were are supposed to be. Either the Constitution means what it says, or none at all. There can be no middle.

    With our independence, so were our Rights re-affirmed: secure in our papers/places and no property taken w/o just compensation. Re-inforced w/ the passage of the 13th (though, ‘passed’ under coercion): slavery shall not exist.

    >
    We do need to cut back to help only those that are unable to work and provide for themselves.
    >

    And, *WHOM* gets to determine those ‘qualifications’?? Please define ‘unable’. Aid? By how much and in what capacity? Shall they be given a ‘living wage’? Paid by whom?

    >
    I think we need to have something like the work programs during the Depression to employ people who are able to work and not working. There were many improvements made by those working in those programs. My uncle was in the CCC as a teen and said it was great for teaching him work ethic. He said the work was hard manual labor and the pay was nearly nothing so there was a big incentive to find actual work ASAP.
    >

    Yes, those ‘work programs’ (another unconstitutional example) which aided to extended the Depression; caused by the creature of their own (illegal) making: The Fed. Reserve.

    No one is stopping another to do as they wish with their OWN property. Quite another for OTHERS to be determining ‘winners vs. losers’ and picking the pockets of the multitude for such ‘generosity’.

  • California Cities Sue Oil Companies over Climate Change

    09/21/2017 9:09:52 AM PDT · 54 of 63
    i_robot73 to CIB-173RDABN

    >
    You think this would only be felt in California? Everyone in the nation will pay the price. It is not just fuel but the cost of all things that are made out of petroleum will get more expensive. It is not a California problem alone. You are in the same boat we are. Government wins, we all lose.
    >

    Per chance some of We *NEED* to lose; not enough pain/suffering spread around to change govt at all levels.

    Any chance of restoring sanity/Federalism isn’t going to be ‘feel good’/easy.

  • University forces students to attend mandatory ‘healthy sex and sexuality’ performance

    09/21/2017 9:06:24 AM PDT · 20 of 21
    i_robot73 to I want the USA back; C19fan

    >
    The moment the colleges get ahold of your kids, they get down to their real purpose: destroying the value system the kids got from you and your church.
    >

    Sorry, but WHAT do you suppose those *FREE* public schools (aka govt indoctrination centers) were doing the 12yrs+ *prior*??

    Least there, the parents/guardians had SOME illusion of ‘control’ over the ‘education’ given.

  • How BernieCare slams working people: Be Careful What you Wish for with Medicare-For-All

    09/21/2017 8:53:19 AM PDT · 16 of 16
    i_robot73 to SeekAndFind; All

    Good. Let’s test it out shall we?

    - All govt employees, contractors, vendors, etc. shall be subject to the Law.
    - It will be ILLEGAL for *anyone* to travel to/from the U.S. for any medical test/procedure/etc.
    - Code the bill like taxes: ‘auto-renewing’ unless specifically repealed for that budget year.

    Let’s see how well it works by forcing GOVT to live within the law as the guinea-pigs.

  • California Cities Sue Oil Companies over Climate Change

    09/21/2017 8:35:10 AM PDT · 46 of 63
    i_robot73 to CIB-173RDABN; eyeamok

    >
    For the sake of argument, let us say they sue and win and get a gazillion dollar judgement. Who pays? While the price of their stock would take a hit, it is the consumers that would eventually pay any settlement in the form of higher prices.

    Making the cost of transportation higher than it is now will eventually result in lower revenue as there is less business (and more people give up and leave the state).
    >

    IMO, *GOOD*. Let the People who continue to elect these ass-hats into office pay the price.

    Pain is sometimes the ONLY means to get the point through.

  • Repeal first, ask questions later

    09/21/2017 5:54:38 AM PDT · 7 of 7
    i_robot73 to DoodleDawg

    >
    “I am just in shock how no one actually cares about the policy any more,” one GOP lobbyist told Caitlin. The details: Graham-Cassidy would roll federal funding for the ACA’s premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion into a single pot, reduce the overall size of that pot, and distribute it to states according to a complex formula. On top of that, it would impose new caps on federal Medicaid spending. Together, those cuts would dramatically roll back the federal government’s role in health care and would almost surely lead to millions more uninsured people than the status quo.
    >

    If it even came CLOSE to doing so, I’d say “Give it a shot.” (knowing full well it’s just the (R)’ism Fascism).

    Course, govt would never let things be and it would be just a starting-point of further govt control and socio-economic engineering.

  • Executive Order that Could Cause Millions to Self-Deport

    09/20/2017 5:19:55 PM PDT · 109 of 111
    i_robot73 to Tammy8

    >
    Welfare is a huge issue, but only a piece of the illegal issues puzzle. Welfare will never just be ended. The only way to do anything about welfare is to cut the budget and keep cutting the budget while going after fraud and waste.
    >

    Correct. It’s not like we have inalienable Rights or anything anyway. Federalism & the Constitution? F* ‘em.

    What ‘fraud & waste’? Pelosi and the gang say there’s no such thing. Does the IRS go after the known fraudsters? Only MediXYZ fraud that’s BLATANT ever gets an arrest. $6B lost @ State? 80+ programs of overlap? What waste?

    >
    The liberals are crying that social service funding was cut in the short budget that was passed and cut even further in the proposed upcoming budget so when they holler we are making some progress. I haven’t looked at it so I don’t know details.
    >

    Progress? I don’t recall any budget passed in some time....only CRs and X-bus’. Plus, a reduction in the % of increase isn’t a ‘CUT’; I damn sure don’t recall the deficit =< $0%. The (D) will cry about ANY drop in funds/growth of govt/control, and the Federal Reg. hasn’t slowed down printing more tomes for the masses.

    >
    Yes I know Obama handed out social services like candy but we still can’t just end it.
    >

    Yes. Yes we can. Legally, it MUST. Except, too many keep re-electing their ‘abusive spouse’, hoping they’ll change....THIS time. The false dichotomy is quite powerful to the sheeple.

    >
    The will of the people is not there yet. Many are wanting to cut it though so that is a start.
    >

    Will of the People? You mean the minority, whose Rights for which the Constitution, via the govt, was to protect vs. the majority\govt?? Unless I missed an Amendment/two in Civics (back when they actually semi-TAUGHT civics).

  • Lindsey Graham: Breitbart, Steve Bannon Critical to Passing Federalism-Focused Obamacare Repeal

    09/20/2017 5:02:13 PM PDT · 19 of 20
    i_robot73 to TChris; All

    >
    >>
    Don’t get the critical response here. Seems pretty obvious that the other alternatives are to either endlessly prop up Obamacare with federal subsidies or let it implode and be replaced with single payer.
    >>

    ??? It IS single-payer. Why pretend one is any different than the other, really?

    Socialized medicine is a BAD IDEA, and Republicans should be cutting its head off and setting fire to it at every opportunity!

    Socialism is BAD. Whether sold by the slice or the whole loaf; whether it has an ‘R’ or a ‘D’ next to it.

    BAD!
    >

    “But, but...this is ‘better’ than *nothing*.”. The 1/2-a-loaf theory. Isn’t that the latest mantra of the mini-Fascists?

    Never mind the party has NEVER circled-around for the other X%....unless it were the (D) for the coup-de-grace.

    “We’ve got to look at the political REALITY”...never mind it’s illegal & unconstitutional to start. DO love the ‘federal subsidies’, as if Fedzilla had any $$ of its own, or AUTHORITY. Geez, it’s no wonder the Right can’t debate its way out of a wet-paper-bag. And, as if O’Care isn’t ‘single-payer’ as it is...*SMH*.

    Appreciate the reminder (to some), but we’re FUBAR already. Just look how much of the debate language, many times here, use the co-opted Leftist dictionary.

  • Barack Obama: Republican efforts to overhaul Obamacare 'aggravating'

    09/20/2017 4:23:13 PM PDT · 26 of 29
    i_robot73 to bagster; Brian Griffin; All

    >
    Dude, you got off light. Try $850 a month and rising.

    Thanks, Osucka.
    >

    Sorry, but why single out Zero? Socialists gotta socialize.

    Want to ‘thank’ anyone, thank the (R) party, whom, over 4 yrs., were voted in on promises of REPEAL (never a word re: replace).

    Except, when they were actually given the opportunity, they folded like a cheap suit (again and again and again).

    And the party apparatchik?? Silence is consent.

    The (R)\(C) ‘think tanks’, gaggle of lawyers, of the *brightest Constitutional minds*?? Silence is consent.

    Why no breaking-news noting the mass registration to the (I)\(L)\(xyz) Party?? Silence is consent.

  • Fireable Offense: John Kelly Embarrassed Of Trump During His UN Speech

    09/19/2017 5:52:51 PM PDT · 60 of 101
    i_robot73 to EEGator; GrandJediMasterYoda

    >
    “Who is this asshole and why is he in his administration?”

    He served in the Corps for 46 years and his son died fighting in Afghanistan.

    What kind of asshole are you?
    >

    One that’ll point out that SERVICE != SAINT-HOOD (See: J. McCain, J.F. Kerry, C. Rangel, etc.); though some around here seem to enjoy erecting false idols.

    2nd, AS a former service member he should know to/how toe the line, shut-up or LEAVE. IE: Be a good little solider.

    While in govt employ, voice your displeasure in private w/ the CiC. The rest of We the People will publicly give the ‘yea’ or ‘nea’, while you continue to feed at the public trough.

    /Proud asshole, out