Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
BTW get used to the program. It will evolve into your worst nightmare.
Cool because it's already the worst nightmare of the Democrats, lol. I mean, they're running from it like cockroaches. I wonder why they aren't embracing it? No, I don't, I kid.
The pollyparrotting is where you try to equate (from what I can tell in the quoted post) Obamacare to things such as Medicare, unemployment benefits, and flood insurance. That's a common tactic, where liberals force people to participate in their programs -- and even fight tooth and nail when Republicans try to allow people to opt out (e.g., privatizing Social Security) -- and then turn around and say that if you used Social Security then you support liberalism. It's a farcical argument.
As far as whether travelaussie should or should not drop insurance based on lack of claims, I'm not sure what your point is.
The OP is apparently too dense to even see the discrepancy in his/her/its telling me to drop homeowner's, flood insurance if we've had no claims, and his statement about not having insurance if you don't need it ( as though a homeowner will never face any reason to have that insurance) yet exalting the glories of Obamacare as essential for everyone.... with that logic in regard to the homeowner's and flood insurance, I might never get sick or need medical care for any reason ( or I might just decline it), so why should I have medical insurance, either?.
Which of course is not my perspective on these matters at all.
Thanks for trying to explain this to the OP, as you said, his switching of the discussion to other programs is a typical liberal tactic, in attempts to accomplish several things, I believe. He/she/it uses it in an attempt to distract someone else from the topic under discussion, because he's incapable of any real debate on the topic, or even a civil conversation about it. He runs out of material pretty quick when he's only regurgitating official liberal-sanctioned talking points. This is often followed ( or in conjunction with) personal attacks or attempts on the part of the liberal to discredit the individual, or group who dares to express ideas not in lockstep with his liberal beliefs- you could see this tactic in the OP's reference to the "lameness" in my decisions regarding homeownership and insurance coverage- funny because the OP knows no details about these matters, and again, it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
It's also a tactic of the left, in their attempt to legitimize a program, a philosophy, or point of view ( and I won't get into how many issues they have done THAT with) to attach it to another issue, philosophy, or program that has become generally accepted in our society- even though doing so actually does NOT legitimize the item.
Their tactics are also meant to belittle, establish a sense of guilt in, or intimidate those who don't see things their way. And when they are called on these tactics, they generally claim innocence, "who me??", which is generally followed by yet another personal attack on those who called them on it.
But...l am not buying it.....far as I am concerned, they don't get to change the facts, change history, or to hijack the language to suit their version of things....
The OP is apparently too dense to even see the discrepancy in his/her/its telling me to drop homeowner's, flood insurance if we've had no claims, and his statement about not having insurance if you don't need it
It's interesting because:
a) if you wanted to not hold the insurance due to not needing it, that would be your decision and irrelevant to anyone, since you would have to pay for damages should anything happen ...so why does he care?
b) he seems to be wanting you to not have the insurance, which is odd because you're paying for it, not someone else, so how does it even compare to Obamacare?
c) if the situation were analogous to Obamacare, you'd wait for your house to be destroyed and then wonder why you can't insurance for it and demand a change
So, nothing about his argument actually makes any sense. Very odd.
Oh, so we should treat Obama the way liberals treated Bush? OK! When can we start with calling him a monkey?
I said I. Not everyone. I'm basically telling you to grow up. Get it? As for the other thing, you're way late. That happened even before he was in office.
I said I. Not everyone. I'm basically telling you to grow up. Get it? As for the other thing, you're way late. That happened even before he was in office.
Oh, it's odd because for some reason every liberal I ever meet claims they treated Bush with total respect and accepted him as "their President" ...and then proceed to say that I should do the same with Obama. It's fascinating how they were all so respectful.
The OP is apparently too dense to even see the discrepancy in his/her/its telling me to drop homeowner's, flood insurance if we've had no claims, and his statement about not having insurance if you don't need it ( as though a homeowner will never face any reason to have that insurance) yet exalting the glories of Obamacare as essential for everyone.... with that logic in regard to the homeowner's and flood insurance, I might never get sick or need medical care for any reason ( or I might just decline it), so why should I have medical insurance, either?.
Which of course is not my perspective on these matters at all.
Thanks for trying to explain this to the OP, as you said, his switching of the discussion to other programs is a typical liberal tactic, in attempts to accomplish several things, I believe. He/she/it uses it in an attempt to distract someone else from the topic under discussion, because he's incapable of any real debate on the topic, or even a civil conversation about it. He runs out of material pretty quick when he's only regurgitating official liberal-sanctioned talking points. This is often followed ( or in conjunction with) personal attacks or attempts on the part of the liberal to discredit the individual, or group who dares to express ideas not in lockstep with his liberal beliefs- you could see this tactic in the OP's reference to the "lameness" in my decisions regarding homeownership and insurance coverage- funny because the OP knows no details about these matters, and again, it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
It's also a tactic of the left, in their attempt to legitimize a program, a philosophy, or point of view ( and I won't get into how many issues they have done THAT with) to attach it to another issue, philosophy, or program that has become generally accepted in our society- even though doing so actually does NOT legitimize the item.
Their tactics are also meant to belittle, establish a sense of guilt in, or intimidate those who don't see things their way. And when they are called on these tactics, they generally claim innocence, "who me??", which is generally followed by yet another personal attack on those who called them on it.
But...l am not buying it.....far as I am concerned, they don't get to change the facts, change history, or to hijack the language to suit their version of things....
You know, this post would be funny if it wasn't so sadly convoluted. I've heard crossword puzzles help the mind stay young...
Oh, it's odd because for some reason every liberal I ever meet claims they treated Bush with total respect and accepted him as "their President" ...and then proceed to say that I should do the same with Obama. It's fascinating how they were all so respectful.
Does seem odd. Both of them huh? Generalize much? Oh wait a minute, that's a liberal tactic. You're so brilliant it's just baffling.
Sure, even if it was two liberals, that still not believable. Glad you agree.
Glad you're so easily amused. Otherwise, you'd just be another whiner. Gotta go now. I have to get some sleep so I can get up early and buy bait with my food stamps and go out on my welfare boat. Life is good.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
