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.
When I read these kindsof things (OP) I observe a person who has no problem taking part in programs while at the same time opposing them.
Personally, the real kicker is the person offers no plausible alternative. It's nonsensical.
No, no evidence was offered that this guy was opposed to state medical programs for adopted children.
That part was implied, but never stated, yet it is the essential crux of the argument. Even you engage in the completely wrong and obviously dishonest argument.
No, no evidence was offered that this guy was opposed to state medical programs for adopted children.
That part was implied, but never stated, yet it is the essential crux of the argument. Even you engage in the completely wrong and obviously dishonest argument.
So, explain it.
This is the nonsensical way he explains it:
From the OP article:
Quote:
Let me set the record straight. Yes, I participate in government programs of which I adamantly oppose. Many of them, actually. Am I a hypocrite for participating in programs that I oppose? If it was that simple, and if participation demonstrated support, then of course. But, my reason for participation in government programs often is not directly related to that issue in and of itself, and it certainly does not demonstrate support. For instance, I participate in government programs in order to stay out of the courts, or jail, so that I can take care of my family; other things I do to avoid fines or for other financial reasons; and some are simply because it is the only practical choice. With each situation, I have to evaluate the consequences of participating or not participating.
As I said earlier, the thing that bugs me the most about these types of things is no plausible alternative solutions are suggested.
No, no evidence was offered that this guy was opposed to state medical programs for adopted children.
That part was implied, but never stated, yet it is the essential crux of the argument. Even you engage in the completely wrong and obviously dishonest argument.
So, explain it.
Unless these quotes from the article are inaccurate, it seems pretty clear.
For example:
“Yes, I participate in government programs of which I adamantly oppose. Many of them, actually,†he wrote. “Am I a hypocrite for participating in programs that I oppose? If it was that simple, and if participation demonstrated support, then of course. But, my reason for participation in government programs often is not directly related to that issue in and of itself, and it certainly does not demonstrate support.â€
As for whether or not he could afford to adopt
"However, he says that when he chose to go into business for himself, he couldn’t find a health insurance plan he could afford."
Perhaps this is one of those "government programs in which he participates, yet adamantly opposes," without having a plausible alternative.
If he wasn't forking over about a third of his income in various taxes maybe the 50% increase in available funds could allow him to buy his own coverage for his kids, hey? It's not like you can do that though, you must pay the taxes and you can then recoup some of the value by utilizing the programs being paid for out of your tax money or not. It still makes sense to use them even as you vote against, if you can.
The classic "get your government hands off my medicare" drumbeat from the anti-intellectual side of the aisle.
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.