bahbah,

The literal definition of "immigrant" is not why people are upset here. It's the context, dude! You can't compare people that sold everything they had and CHOSE to come here to start a new life to slaves who were put into SHACKLES and TORTURED and forced to come here and then WORKED TO AN EARLY GRAVE. You just can't do that, it defies all context and reason.

im not defending carson because i haven't paid attention to what he said but what i do know is that the left is hyper sensitive, prone to twisting meaning and peoples motives, and misinformed about history

slavery is a much bigger part of global history than people realize. in a lot of ways surfs were close enough to slaves to categorize them similarly. its all forms and degrees of oppression. the history of humanity is a history of oppression. thats global, not some localized abomination which it seems to be treated as any time it gets brought up. people are so sensitive to this part of history it seems they haven't really wrapped their head around ordinary it was in recent global history

on the specific point of "voluntary". thats not the correct way to look at this or phrase it either imo. it noted that refugees arent truly immigrating voluntarily. and it could also be pointed out that taking refugees as immigrants is more moral if you are choosing between refugees and adventurous europeans. my point is im not sure if voluntary is a great measure

but who knows, maybe this is just another situation where both sides talk past each other and get to demonize the other side through twisting words and meaning, intentionally or not

Are we supposed to expect that every black American politician will know that slavery is a sensitive issue? There's no telling what the left's buttons are these days.

I think you need to go back and look at his context. I don't think any reasonable person can listen to his speech and say "I really believe that Carson doesn't see a difference between slaves and other immigrants who voluntarily move to another country."

you don't need to. i don't think this offends anyone. i would imagine it would take anyone less that 5 minutes to dig up a dozen posts out of probably hundreds where you just bold something in a post and doing exactly what you did here. as usual, you fail to articulate any point. its just an empty proclamation that you are right in a trump-like way. your posting habits and history demonstrate a failure to articulate arguments or ideas. its an entire body of work. its transparent to anyone observing your posts with any sort of awareness

i highly recommend mods leave these posts up so that posters can get a better sense of 5ive and consider the rest of his posts accordingly

list of importance

1. what people get sensitive about
2. everything else

yeah thats a productive way to view the world. that is called maternal instinct. when a baby cries you don't really make any judgement or assessments. its crying, you sympathize

Exactly. Sure, maybe if he'd thought a little before he spoke, he wouldn't sound completely detached from reality, but is that really how we want things to be? A bunch of people thinking before sounding like morons?

That's not the world I want to live in. I want pure spew all day long.

The real problem is that he knows nothing about HUD, is opposed to public housing, and is part of the administrations efforts to use the HUD budget entirely to funnel money to Trump and whoever he owes or wants to reward.

Still he's awesome to "libertarians" and conservatives for responsible government because he made liberals mad.

Carson is just an empty suit. That office is Bannon's now.

Bannon: Trump administration is in unending battle for ‘deconstruction of the administrative state’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.2e564f125cef

I agree with that. It's nice to have both options. It would be better if it worked more efficiently, though.

We need a special prosecutor! Jeff Sessions must resign for perjuring himself in confirmation hearings, on issues of crucial importance to our national security. He can no longer remain as Attorney General after showing such a blatant disregard for ethics, the truth, and the American people.


https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/sta...48474096578564

Long thread explaining how the Republicare bill (AHCA) will lead to death spirals and skyrocketing insurance premiums for sure:

https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/838942316920471554

https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/838946670469660672

https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/838949814423412736

einbert

Sessions is not going to resign over this and nor should he. It has not been proven that he committed perjury and I very much doubt that it ever will be.

You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

Now get over it.

Session is a bald faced liar and he did his lying in sworn testimony before congress. He should be in jail.

Why do you not care that the Attorney General lied under oath to the American people? Why do you hate America?

I love the idea of lowering tax credits. This is health insurance - not wealth distribution. If you want to further distribute wealth do it via taxes.

I like the idea of charging people who use the health insurance more often higher premiums - make those mooches pay their fair share. They should extend this to all types of insurance! Can you imagine life INS co. charging old people more for a policy (since they are more likely to die sooner) and car INS co. charging men (who drive more) and young people (who drive more reckless) more? Simply a brilliant idea.

I really like the idea of punishing people less for choosing to spend their hard earned money on other things besides INS.

I would seriously suggest that you have a look at the definition of the word lie, and note the emphasis on intent.

And then come back and tell me how you know for sure that Sessions made a false statement with deliberate intent to deceive.

So, Broadway is arguing that the nation's most important lawyer, in the most important moment of his life that he studied for weeks for, was merely incompetent? That's reason alone to be fired. His reaction right after his lie is such a tell as well.

Another way of putting this is that you like the idea of people who get sick (also known as "mooches") - an unavoidable part of being human that can happen to anyone without warning - facing exorbitant costs and being put in extremely difficult financial positions as a result.

And though I disagree with it, that's a reasonable thing for you to want - as long as you still want it that way when you get cancer and your premiums skyrocket to the point of bankrupting you.

Given the current Republican plan, that also means you want ~15 million people who currently have health insurance to lose it. It means you want people who don't have health care to be disincentivized from acquiring it. And your own logic ("I want people who use health care more to pay more") disincentivizes people from ever going to the doctor or receiving any preventative care which can save money down the road.

Side note - it's amazing how easily Trumpkins were fooled into supporting standard Republican orthodoxy. Rich people are going to get significant tax cuts out of this and health care access for the poor is going to be significantly reduced.

What does all this do for the poor white coal miner in West Virginia, or the hardscrabble unemployed steel worker in Pennsylvania, or whoever the avatar of the Trump election might be? Nothing, of course (going to be harder for them to get/afford health insurance now), but who cares, all the rich bigwigs who donated to the Trump campaign are going to save millions (not an exaggeration) in taxes and that's what's important, right?

MAGA!

bahba literally doesn't understand how insurance in general works.

I was going to make this comment but it is true that insurance schemes do vary premiums based on risk, which is along the lines of charging more to people who use more. So it seemed at least possible that his comment was just a banal endorsement of that already existing feature of insurance schemes. But yeah, at some point sharing risk is the entire point of insurance and in some obvious tension with an ideal of paying for what you use. I wasn't sure how generous to be in reading that post :P

I was referring to the oldes as mooches - since one of the main reasons Obamacare failed is because not enough youngsters/healthy people were signing up. I am on the fence with people who have preexisting conditions.

The idea of charging higher premiums for someone who goes to the doctor more than for the same person who doesn't go to the doctor is an interesting idea. I haven't really thought about that as I was thinking more along the lines of stereotyping people based off of sex & age. I'm not sure how I feel about that yet - I know I personally don't go to the doctor (despite having INS) so this plan would be good for me. Under this health insurance would act a lot more like car insurance.

Uh, it's your idea.

Perhaps you should spend more time thinking through your ideas and less time treating this thread like a live, unfiltered view into what's happening in your brain in any given moment.

This is a conversation that's been had before. He literally thinks it's a scam if he's paying $X in insurance and gets paid <$X in insurance claims.