Conservatives...

WinterBorn said:
Hey SF, at least we know how to get a rise out of Bfoon. Just bring up some dalliance or misdeeds of the Kennnedy clan and he'll start foaming at the mouth.
Click to expand...

He reminds me a lot of Cypress. The king of cut and paste and straw man creations. All he does is post links, refuses to answer most questions, then when you provide him with links or evidence that is contrary to his position, he creates one straw man after another or tries to argue some technicality or mundane point in an attempt to divert the conversation.

Bottom line, Joe Kennedy was a highly unethical person. He was exactly the type of person Bfgrn states he hates, yet here we have Bfgrn defending him because his last name is Kennedy.
 
Threedee said:
Regarding the issue of a politician's private life, I would like to pose this question:

If you were on a business hiring board, and you had two identical candidates, who had MBA's from Harvard Business School, and 4.0 undergraduates from the same place, with equally impressive internships and job histories, etc., and the only difference between them was that one was known to be an avid adulterer on the outside (without effecting the workplace in any way) and one is known to be a good spouse - which would you select? And are you wrong if you select the guy who's not cheating?


FYI - Dixie and a handful of others do not claim to be remotely libertarian. Dixie openly criticizes the philosophy. But YOU LEFTISTS are clearly all a bunch of commies just because one or two of you may happen to openly be communist.
Click to expand...

I'll go one better... you are a corporation looking for a spokesperson to represent your company, does that person's personal life matter? If you are Dell Computers, and you hire some young guy who the kids all think is cool, and he gets busted for pot... do you keep him as your spokesperson? If he gets drunk and makes antisemitic or racist remarks, do you keep him on as a spokesperson, claiming his personal life doesn't matter? Why is it, every other job in America, is hinged on your private life, but Democrats somehow think a politician should be insulated?
 
Superfreak said:
Hey you fucking moron.... DO TRY TO PAY ATTENTION.... you keep saying the SAME thing I do and then pretending it is something different.

I stated what Kennedy did was LEGAL.... just highly UNETHICAL.... I know a moron such as yourself has a hard time with reading comprehension.... but DO try to keep up if you are going to attempt to defend the unethical behavior of Joe Kennedy.... you know... the guy that MADE his money while hurting others.
Click to expand...

In regards to your slander of Joe Kennedy, the bootlegging charge is FALSE. There was NOTHING even mentioned about bootlegging from people who would have loved the bury him. Please author your apology.

Three times during the 1930s, Kennedy was appointed to federal positions requiring Senate confirmation (chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, chairman of the U.S. Maritime Commission, Ambassador to Great Britain). At a time when the memory of Prohibition was vivid and the passions it inflamed still smoldered, no one seemed to think Joe Kennedy had been a bootlegger—not the Republicans, not the anti-Roosevelt Democrats, not remnant Klansmen or anti-Irish Boston Brahmins or cynical newsmen or resentful Dry leaders still seething from the humiliation of Repeal. There’s nothing in the Senate record that suggests anyone brought up the bootlegging charge; there’s nothing about it in the press coverage that appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, or The Boston Globe. There was nothing asserting, suggesting, or hinting at bootlegging in the Roosevelt-hating Chicago Tribune, or in the long-dry Los Angeles Times.
 
Bfgrn said:
In regards to your slander of Joe Kennedy, the bootlegging charge is FALSE. There was NOTHING even mentioned about bootlegging from people who would have loved the bury him. Please author your apology.
Click to expand...

I apologize to myself for wasting so much time on a fucking retard like you.

I have addressed your stupidity many times. Re read the thread until you find yourself intelligent enough to grasp what has been written.
 
Superfreak said:
I apologize to myself for wasting so much time on a fucking retard like you.

I have addressed your stupidity many times. Re read the thread until you find yourself intelligent enough to grasp what has been written.
Click to expand...

Hey pea brain...if Joe Kennedy was guilty of bootlegging, which was your false slanderous charge, he would have never made it through 3 Senate confirmation hearings.

You are wrong, and you can't admit it. I am not surprised.
 
Dixie said:
It's not even that good WB... No one lied about death panels, they are IN the Obamacare legislation! The only thing is, they didn't call it a death panel, it's a 'cost advisory board' but the basic function is the same. Now, this thread is not about Obamacare or health care, it's about conservatives, and just like any time you corner a pinhead in an argument they can't win, they attempt to divert the topic to something else. We were discussing personal responsibility for your actions, and the private lives of public servants. Bfoon realized he could never prevail in such an argument on merit, so he attempts to change subjects... let's talk about Ronald Reagan... let's talk about the death panel "lie" that really wasn't! Let's talk about ANYTHING but integrity and ethics in our elected leaders!
Click to expand...

Hey Dixie, how many time do I have to debunk your 'death panel' lie...every day, every week? You like to call people pinheads, but isn't a pinhead someone who keeps spewing the same lies over, and over, and over. Even after the lie is exposed.

The Facts About the Independent Payment Advisory Board

Independent Payment Advisory Board – IPAB, which was created by the Affordable Care Act. Here’s how IPAB works:

* 15 experts including doctors and patient advocates would be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to serve on IPAB.

* IPAB would recommend policies to Congress to help Medicare provide better care at lower costs. This could include ideas on coordinating care, getting rid of waste in the system, incentivizing best practices, and prioritizing primary care.

* IPAB is specifically prohibited by law from recommending any policies that ration care, raise taxes, increase premiums or cost-sharing, restrict benefits or modify who is eligible for Medicare.

* Congress then has the power to accept or reject these recommendations. If Congress rejects the recommendations, and Medicare spending exceeds specific targets, Congress must either enact policies that achieve equivalent savings or let the Secretary of Health and Human Services follow IPAB’s recommendations.
 
Dixie said:
A death panel by any other name....
Click to expand...

I found a new Avatar for you Dixie

pinhead.jpg


So, we must not try to lower Medicare costs, because that is a bad thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top