davjohns

Have all the children without parents been adopted by loving homes? I missed that. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Tx cares about women Bull-fucking-shit. They care about abortion. Some honestly consider every pregnancy to be a baby; some care about the fact that their constituents care. If they cared about women, they'd be all over making all of the other services provided by those clinics available. But they don't. Interesting how a vasectomy doesn't require admitting privileges; it's more invasive and dangerous. But no one is up in arms over that one, are they? Wendy P. OK. You guys made Wendy cuss. I'll get involved. There is no war on women. That's a political ploy to mobilize emotions and votes. Are there people who want to control women, hate women, etc? I'm sure. I doubt any political party has the market cornered on those loonies. Abortion is an incredibly difficult issue. Three people are involved. They all have their own difficulties. It is not right that a woman has to go it alone just because she is female. It is not right that a man has no say in whether his child makes it to birth just because he is male. It is not right that the child has no say just because the other two are louder. It is not right that women have to fight to get deadbeat fathers to meet their obligations. It is not right that fathers have to fight to have influence over their children (I'm assuming the parents are not married here). It is not right that children have parents who aren't unified in raising the child and looking out for its' needs. Three peopel involved. Three different sets of issues and rights. No universal solution as far as I can tell. Please stop pretending that someone else is a villain just because they come down on one of the three sides. Calling names, making up false wars on a genre, insulting intelligence, pretending someone else is in the extreme because they take a side...none of this is helpful or persuades me that your position is reasonable or thought it. It's an emotional reaction. It is an emotional subject, so this is understandable. It just does't lead to a common solution. What is the purpose of debate if you never arrive at a mutually agreeable solution? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

GODDAMMIT Possibly. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I have no reason to believe that someone from one political perspective is more or less likely to commit voter fraud than someone from another political perspective. Each party likes to pretend it has a lock on virtue. I can't tell that either has any virtue. I do think it is reasonable to have someone show a free, government issued, picture ID when they vote. If early voting seems to favor one party over another, one of the parties isn't getting their people out to vote early. Get over it. I think if we are going to have mobile polling stations going into neighborhoods, we need to have them going everywhere. If we are going to give voters a free bus ride to the polls, we should give everyone a free ride to the polls. Every vote is equally important. Don't give some a preference. Pretty simple, really. And the gerrymandering thing? Popular vote rules. Get rid of the Electoral College, districting, etc. Majority rule. Saves money and settles the issue. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Contrary to what I see here and in other commentary, the President is far from stupid. I think anyone who is honest has to admit that some of the things he (and others) said to sell this legislation were bunk from the beginning. He knew it. Others supporting the legislation knew it. I knew it. Anyone who was paying attention knew it. There was never a way for everyone to keep the plan they had. Some people were carrying coverage just for catestrophic events. Obviously, that was going to change. There was no way to cover everyone and reduce the average household cost by $2,500. That was just stupid. If you want more, you have to pay more. Then, there's the government oversight you have to pay for as well. Pass it to find out what's in it? That one might have actually been true. Given what was promised vs what we are getting. Nancy slipped up and told us the truth on that one. Who knew? Of course, she made up for it by saying everyone's premiums would go down. You see, if you say "you can keep it. Period." or "everyone" or "average", people stop asking questions. It seems a definitive answer. If they said, "most", "some", "many" or the like, people would have instantly asked, "Where do I fall?" That's a question they weren't ready to answer. Reduce the budget deficit? Not even if you had a fiscal magic wand. Yes. Lies were told to sell the public some legislation. The public still didn't want it. The public got it anyhow. Not the first time. Not the last time. Got a problem with it? Take it to the polls. My guess is that the overwhelming majority of Americans will still vote a straight party ticket...like usual. Character doesn't count. Results don't count. All that seems to matter is that MY SIDE WINS! While we all go down the tubes. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I expected you to point out that I COULD have had a serious illness or injury. But I took a calculated risk. People do that. Now, I'm being told that I can't be trusted with those calculated risks. There's a terribly slippery slope there. Skydivers COULD be badly injured and cost the health industry money out of proportion with projected probabilities. Need to outlaw skydiving (hang gliding, SCUBA, martial arts...all the things I enjoy). Speed kills. Some motorcycles already have speed limiters on them because someone COULD go too fast. Need to put speed limiters on all vehicles. You see, you can always argue that something COULD have happened. But the reality is that young, single people really don't need health insurance from a statistical perspective. That's why the law is forcing them to get it. They pay for something they don't need so people with pre-existing conditions can get coverage. You have to be careful that the precautionary measures are commensurate with the probable outcomes; not the possible outcomes. I'm not completely disagreeing with you. I just don't like the way this system is playing out. Other countries have socialized medicine, but they have a flat tax to cover it. That makes much more sense to me. It's the only way I know to be 'fair'. Whenever our government comes up with some convoluted system of taxes, credits, exemptions, etc. they invariably mess it up and it costs way more to administer than is necessary. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

If you are going to use this increasingly shitty analogy, then the end of this sentence would say "instead of stealing them off you which is the current situation" Seems like a better option don't you think? Sorry. Bad logic. Your argument assumes anyone without health insurance is stealing from others. Even when I didn't carry health insurance, I paid for the healthcare I used. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Very sad story. The President's mistake was one I see on here over and over. This lady was a single datapoint in hundreds of millions of datapoints. He claimed this single datapoint proved a larger conclusion. This was horrible reasoning. Using this single datapoint to prove the system is broke is equally in error. Granted, the negative datapoints are piling up... I am a simple man. I often think of things in simple terms. This program reminds me of a story. I don't remember it all, but it ends with a Native American saying, "Only the US government would try to cut a foot from the bottom of the blanket; sew it to the top of the blanket; and think you can get a bigger blanket." I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Two points - I had to explain this whole thing to someone last night as best i could. She works for a hospital. There was a big meeting for the hospital to explain that everyone's premiums are going up as a result of Obamacare. This lady's were going up $175 per month for her and her husband. She's 55. Low to mid income. Just a datapoint. Not a conclusion. I am reading reports that young, healthy people are not signing up. Given the relatively low penalty in 2014, this isn't surprising. It makes more financial sense for single twenty-somethings to not sign up. Older people with pre-existing conditions are signing up. This doesn't bode well for the short term financial stability of the system. Those young, healthy premiums were supposed to pay for the older, broken people. Just a couple of (admittedly pessimistic) datapoints. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Sometimes, I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I read the comments here. Some here will defend any action, however ridiculous, if the person who committed it wears the 'Democrat' label. Others do the same with someone wearing a 'Republican' label. Two sides of the same coin to me. Both parties want your money. Both parties spend your money to stay in power; not for your well-being. Both parties want to crawl into your home and tell you how to live your personal lives. Both parties want more government control over you. Both parties lie to get what they want. Both parties (oddly) purport to be morally superior and more intelligent than the other. The average Republican voter doesn't want to abandon anyone who truly needs help. They just want to cut off those who abuse the system. The average Democrat voter doesn't want to finance sloth. They want to make sure the weakest are protected. IMO, most voters are very close to the same position and arguing fiercely over where to the draw the line...the difference between the two positions is often centimeters apart. Meanwhile, the media tries to polarize us because it makes them money and politicians try to polarize us because it helps them control us. It's hard to mobilize voters to get out and vote for you by admitting that you and your opponent have breakfast together every morning and often sponsor legislation together. They need a good villain to mobilize their base. You people fall for it; hook...line...sinker. It might be amusing if it wasn't happening throughout our country on a larger scale...and tearing us apart. Again...IMO. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Well, alright then. I'll come over and watch that show. Sounds pretty entertaining. lol I will get together with friends if they want to watch Alabama / Auburn or the Superbowl. I have no problem picking a team and acting like they are my favorite just to pick a fight (not a real fight). I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

You might want to re-word that. I'll look it up to see if anyone said something about discouraging or disenfranchise legal voters who would likely vote democrat. The way you worded it could mean they wanted to disenfranchise illegal voters (say, illegal aliens, actual fraudulent voters, etc.) because those illegal voters are likely to vote democrat. I got a chuckle. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Actually, I just made up a study that shows neon yellow cars are in 86% fewer head-on collisions compared to other colors. So, all cars should be required to be neon yellow...for the children. Oh! And speed limiters. Nobody needs to go over 70mph, so cars shouldn't be able to go any faster. Driver's license smart cards to activate the car so we know who was driving it. Tracking devices tied to the GPS. Exceed the speed limit? The GPS notifies the government computer which issues your citation and texts the citation to your cell phone...and automatically deducts it from your bank account. It's fine if you don't want to sign up for this system...but there's a tax, of course. If you don't pay it, your smart card driver's license is deactivated and your car is confiscated (you don't need it anymore) and sold to pay the indebtedness. I could just have all kinds of fun with this way of thinking. Very soon, I'll be inserting monitoring devices in your livingroom for your safety and convenience. Maybe we'll call the folks who monitor it the 'Thought Police'. Has a nice ring to it, no? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I'm a Soutern Atheist...meaning I don't watch football. College ball is more important than religion in the South. For some reason, we don't support pro teams. I just don't care to watch someone else have fun. If you want to go out and play a game, count me in. Watching someone else...not so much. I'm the same way about porn. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

...now YOU'RE adding facts. Wasn't TSA - it was the airline ticket counter. You are absolutely correct. Thanks for getting me back on track. It made much more sense in my mind that TSA would do it, since they are a pseudo enforcement agency. The airline is quite different in my mind. I am much less ok with the airline doing it. Alternate thought - I thank cashiers for asking for ID when I give them a credit card. It protects me. Mom could have thanked the lady for being protective of the little girl. It almost becomes an issue of 'how do you want to take it?' ETA: Someone else posted this same idea while I was typing. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I think there is a portion of the population of 'feminists' who are not pro-woman so much as anti-men. Insisting that other women groom themselves as required by others may fit that sub-section. I knew a woman who considered herself a feminist. She would make a show of refusing to walk through a door if a man held it open. She would watch other men walk through that door that was being held by a man, but she would stop and stare at the man holding the door. This did not make her equal. If she were equal, she would have walked through with the others. I've long maintained that many of the ethnocentristic qualities of US society have been beaten down. Some lingering undertones remain, but I think they would die a natural death if not fed. I see most of the 'up with my race / gender / religion / etc' groups as highlighting differences and feeding the undertones. They no longer seek equality. They seek an edge. That brings a reaction. The reaction is the very thing we once sought to put behind us. After WWI, the victors oppressed the former aggressors. The result was WWII. In a similar manner, you will not achieve equality by constantly seeking an advantage for your chosen cause and vilification of those you brand the enemy. You become the perpetrator of the problem. I see many groups championing the cause of some minority segment. I don't see anyone advocating equality. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Love you, girl, but you're adding facts now. If proper ID had been presented showing she had the same last name, she was calling the lady 'mom', and she was playing with the apparent sister, that could easily tip the scale the other way. The difference in race is an indicator. Now, you've presented other indicators that make the TSA actions less appropriate. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I'm still wondering how anyone got banned from SC... I agree that the story ruffles my feathers. The way the questions are structured would suggest there is a protocol. If that is the case and it is uniformly applied, I don't have an issue with it. It is still unusual enough that it could have been a 'tell'. If they also stop Angelina Jolie's children (and anyone else with a blended family), then it is an understandable nuisance given the possible consequences. I find it odd that they had to ask anything. Do children not have to present ID when they go through security? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

In high school, I ended up with a master key to the school. A buddy and I used it for such nefarious enterprises as moving supplies around. In the morning, some teachers would have no erasers and others would have a plethora. We were criminal masterminds. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

To whom it may concern: I regret to inform you that you are wildly mis-informed. I have just completed an intensive inspection of every brick paver for a six block area. There are no weeds in the bricks. BETWEEN the bricks, however, it is a jungle. Someone should do something. Sincerely, Alternately: So sorry you received that notice. It must have been frustrating for you. It's fixed. Roundup was on sale. Also, you will not be receiving notification that the grass is too tall, the bushes need trimming, or the trees need pruning for a VERY long time. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

As a consumer protection feature, I'm not particularly worried about minimum standards. Let's face it, nobody reads the contract and fewer understand it. So, minimum standards level the field between the consumer and the corporation. However, that's not all this act did, is it? In fact, that's a drop in the bucket. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I had to look up some old threads and then google to figure out what you were talking about. I never got around to jumping with Mike. He was about the same distance away as my home DZ. I still get email from him (distribution list) when he isn't running loads for the weekend. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Just a note: the term 'health insurance' is no longer applicable. Insurance guards against future, unrealized problems. Since pre-existing conditions are no longer a disqualifier, it is kind of like buying car insurance after a wreck. It's really just a tool to difuse costs over a population. We need a new term. And for the sake of intellectual honesty, the insurance companies are now just an additional layer of administration / expense. We may as well move over to a full 'one-payer' system. That's what it is. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

An old man stops a young man at a mall and asks for help finding his wife. The young man says, "Wow. I can't find my wife, either. We can search together. My wife is 24, is a swimsuit model, has long blonde hair, is wearing a halter top, high heels, and a mini-skirt. What about yours?" The old man says, "Nevermind. Let's just look for yours." I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Inconceivable! You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. -Indigo Montoya I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.