Originally Posted by djplong

Heh. I know.. It's just that I was disappointed in the choices. It's not like I want terrorists to go free and I don't want people locked up forever without a warrant. I want DUE PROCESS - but that kind of answer frequently wasn't an option.

Even though you joke about it, it IS true. If the Democrats were had ANY skills at communicating a message, the Republicans (at least this year) wouldn't stand a chance. Even Bill Maher, whom I know you don't like, gives the GOP props for getting and STAYING on their message.

Democrats can't say what they really want to do, and are trying to do, as they would be hunted down like dogs, so they have to lie and obfuscate. The Democrat machine is hell-bent on creating a socialist/communist utopia in this country by means of incrementalism. How can they say this and win anything?

As far as the test, try just giving the MOST appropriate answer coupled with how important that point is to you on each question and see if you get another answer.

A computer quiz cannot deal in vagaries.

Richielioin~ You are exactly right! If the Dems honestly communicated precisely what it is that they are trying to do, the Democratic party would become extinct! Deception is the only way they can "pass the bill" before we get to know what is in it. Bait and Switch = Business as Usual for the Dems.

I believe that Democrats are trying to foist a 'socialist utopia' on us as much as I believe that the Republicans are trying to force us into a fascist renaissance.

When Bush was in office, I was *constantly* arguing with leftists who just 'knew' what was in the minds of Bush and Cheney (while arguing how stupid Bush was - kind of like how SOME right wingers talk about Obama being Muslim yet still a follower of the CHRISTIAN Rev. Wright).

I *will* say this about Democrats - I've yet to hear a single one of them state what their "max tax" would be. The point at which they'd say "Yeah, that's enough, even for us.". I've been wanting to get an answer from one of them since Kennedy was running in 1980. Apparently I'm not the only one. I think P. J. O'Rourke also mentioned it in his book "Parliament of Whores".

Likewise I haven't really heard any GOP candidate tell me how much security is enough - but that's a relatively recent development.

Hmmmm

Surprised me.

Gingrich 94% Much higher than even Herman Cain.

Think I will go Gingrich over Santorum for Florida.

Remember as all the liberals told us, "A persons private life doesn't matter", as it helped them continue their love for Bill Clinton. (remember this as they attempt to tear Newt apart)

Originally Posted by djplong

I believe that Democrats are trying to foist a 'socialist utopia' on us as much as I believe that the Republicans are trying to force us into a fascist renaissance.

Not Republicians. I always love it as those similar to the Occupy folks throw this term "Facist" around as it works for them to equate it to any conservative who disagrees with them.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism

Originally Posted by djplong

I believe that Democrats are trying to foist a 'socialist utopia' on us as much as I believe that the Republicans are trying to force us into a fascist renaissance.

I'm sorry, but you're living in darkness. ObamaCare itself, which you are a huge fan of, is the one single biggest "socialist utopia" scheme to ever come down the pike in the history of this country. Yet, you claim not to see it. The control of the health industry, coupled with the economic control of every ancillary corporation who is dependent on the health care industry for their own business and who's fortunes will now be predicated on a acquiescence to the new political order instead of just traditional business practices, is the biggest single government takeover of the private sector for the "public good" in our nation's history.

Also, if there is a "fascist renaissance" that is also the more analogous to the leftist in our society than Republicans by a long shot. It's the leftist factions of our country who are the major purveyors of fascist ideas like the acceptance of political violence to create national regeneration.

Fascism promotes a state directed regulated economy that is dedicated to the nation, and the use and primacy of regulated private property and private enterprise contingent upon service to the nation or state. These are all ideas more closely associated with the leftists in the Democrat Party than anything the Republicans propose.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

I'm sorry, but you're living in darkness. ObamaCare itself, which you are a huge fan of, is the one single biggest "socialist utopia" scheme to ever come down the pike in the history of this country. Yet, you claim not to see it. The control of the health industry, coupled with the economic control of every ancillary corporation who is dependent on the health care industry for their own business and who's fortunes will now be predicated on a acquiescence to the new political order instead of just traditional business practices, is the biggest single government takeover of the private sector for the "public good" in our nation's history.

Richie, have you NOT read ANYthing I've posted on ObamaCare? There is *ONE* par tof it that I like - the fact that I can cover my daughter on my helth plan until she's 26 - just like I could before EXCEPT she doesn't have to be a grad student. She's actually WORKING for a living for someone who does NOT offer health insurance.

Did you NOT see my post from a couple of days ago where I said that I thought it was corporate welfare with an unconstitutional purchase mandate?

I *LOATHE* the fact that still NOTHING has been done to address the fact that we spend MORE THAN TWICE per capita on health care and yet have a substandard 'system' no matter HOW you rank it or by whom.

You can put words in my mouth all you want, but that won't make them true.

Quite frankly, I expected better of you.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

Also, if there is a "fascist renaissance" that is also the more analogous to the leftist in our society than Republicans by a long shot. It's the leftist factions of our country who are the major purveyors of fascist ideas like the acceptance of political violence to create national regeneration.

Fascism promotes a state directed regulated economy that is dedicated to the nation, and the use and primacy of regulated private property and private enterprise contingent upon service to the nation or state. These are all ideas more closely associated with the leftists in the Democrat Party than anything the Republicans propose.

My apologies for using the colloquial version of the word - I should have known better.

Things like SOPA bring us closer to a POLICE STATE. That's the term I SHOULD have used. Everything is justified "in the name of security" just like Democrats used to justify everything THEY wanted as "for the children".

Detaining American citizens indefinitely without due process? Sounds like a police state to me - all in the name of protecting us from terrorism.

The TSA and their Rapiscan deals? Ugh.. More security theater.

And yet, who's catching the terrorists? PASSENGERS ON AIRPLANES and cops doing on-the-ground investigative police work.

DJPlong: I don't want to post your entire post above again, but you're willing to accept this socialist takeover because you feel you personally benefit from it. Right or wrong?

What you feel about our current system is totally irrelevant to the discussion on the bane to our way of life that is ObamaCare.

If you're willing to accept this socialist garbage you as much a part of the problem as if you crafted it.

If you want to say now that you oppose this plan and want it's repeal, then I will apologize for my misinterpretation of your intent in your previous posts.

SOPA is a stupid plan that was written by a Lamar Alexander, but some conservative groups, and the Tea Party Patriots in particular along with The American Civil Liberties Union are against this legislation also.

It has bi-partisan opposition. But, if this bill ever makes it to Obama's desk.......and he signs it...........he owns it, along with his party.

YES - I want the court to OVERTURN the mandate first and foremost. I find the thought of HAVING to buy something just to exist to be disgustingly reprehensible. And, for me that would be Step One. There's a LOT more I'd like to see going away because it still doesn't live up to the first word in the name of the bill - "Affordable".

I find it incredible that, of all the ways the government COULD have "taken over" health care they chose the method that, for the most part, is the worst of all available options. It's not like we don't have examples of what works in other countries. But did we do that? No.

As I've stated, the ONLY part of Obamacare that I liked is the "26 and under" part because it made sense. If my daughter was still in college, my plan would have covered her without the government getting involved. The fact that she WORKS for a living then ends up working against her and that's the part that I found unfair.

Now, I didn't know who 'wrote' SOPA (kinda shocked if it's true that Alexander did) but, if the Tea Party is against it, then I can finally say that there's something I can be in unqualified agreement with them on. Who would have ever thought conservatives (Tea Party) and liberals (ACLU) could agree on anything? My knowledge of SOPA basically comes from what I've been reading in the tech trade press and from releases from organizations like the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation).

ANYone who supports this (SOPA) is showing their true colors. They either are consumed with the modern version of "commies under the bed" or they're in the pocket of Big Media.

Originally Posted by djplong

YES - I want the court to OVERTURN the mandate first and foremost. I find the thought of HAVING to buy something just to exist to be disgustingly reprehensible. And, for me that would be Step One. There's a LOT more I'd like to see going away because it still doesn't live up to the first word in the name of the bill - "Affordable".

I find it incredible that, of all the ways the government COULD have "taken over" health care they chose the method that, for the most part, is the worst of all available options. It's not like we don't have examples of what works in other countries. But did we do that? No.

As I've stated, the ONLY part of Obamacare that I liked is the "26 and under" part because it made sense. If my daughter was still in college, my plan would have covered her without the government getting involved. The fact that she WORKS for a living then ends up working against her and that's the part that I found unfair.

Now, I didn't know who 'wrote' SOPA (kinda shocked if it's true that Alexander did) but, if the Tea Party is against it, then I can finally say that there's something I can be in unqualified agreement with them on. Who would have ever thought conservatives (Tea Party) and liberals (ACLU) could agree on anything? My knowledge of SOPA basically comes from what I've been reading in the tech trade press and from releases from organizations like the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation).

ANYone who supports this (SOPA) is showing their true colors. They either are consumed with the modern version of "commies under the bed" or they're in the pocket of Big Media.

OK, I guess I sort of owe you an apology for misunderstanding some of what you're saying. But as long as this law is on the books our way of life is threatened. Just repealing mandates only weakens the law and slows down it's national implementation, but in the end it will end private healthcare.

As far as your daughter, as a father myself, I know what you're saying. But why 26?; why not 36? Is your daughter still your dependent? Is she on your Income Tax form or is she a private filer of her own? Now I and everyone else are supposed to subsidize your daughter's health care insurance until the age of 26? Why?; what's magic about that age? She's an adult under the law in all matters except health care?
I'm sorry, but I don't get it. I know it's a load off your mind as a father, but what's fair about it?

Full Disclosure: Not every Tea Party Group is dead set against the SOPA bill. The largest group, The Tea Party Patriots, is totally against it, being a much more plugged in group, and not a small state organization. Lots of people don't see the big picture on this bill as you and I do.

Also, I got my Lamar's mixed up. The bill was written by Lamar Smith (R-TX) and a reported bi-partisan group of 12. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Originally Posted by RichieLion

OK, I guess I sort of owe you an apology for misunderstanding some of what you're saying. But as long as this law is on the books our way of life is threatened. Just repealing mandates only weakens the law and slows down it's national implementation, but in the end it will end private healthcare.

Unless you mean that 'Obamacare' is somehow a 'stealth' step towards a fully nationalized system like the UK, I disagree with your last part. The mandate REQUIRES us to buy from PRIVATE insurers if we don't get insurance from our employers.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

As far as your daughter, as a father myself, I know what you're saying. But why 26?; why not 36? Is your daughter still your dependent? Is she on your Income Tax form or is she a private filer of her own? Now I and everyone else are supposed to subsidize your daughter's health care insurance until the age of 26? Why?; what's magic about that age? She's an adult under the law in all matters except health care?
I'm sorry, but I don't get it. I know it's a load off your mind as a father, but what's fair about it?

What's fair? Well, what's UNfair is the idea that my daughter has to stay in school in order to be covered by health insurance, whereas if she WORKS, she can't get it. Kind of like how other programs punish you when you're starting to become self-sufficient.

What's fair is that, demographically speaking, it costs next to nothing to cover her. I mean, it's odd that, without the law, I could have one 24-year-old who can't be covered, but if I bred like a rabbit I could have TEN kids under 20 covered for the same price.

For the record, I'm covering my older daughter and my ex-wife is covering our younger (19-year-old) daughter. In a way, it's punishing my ex because I'm covering 3 (my wife is the third person) and my ex is only covering 2. I certainly didn't set it up that way but, in the end that's how it worked out thanks to me being a contractor at the time and her working at the Post Office. Now I'm full-time and have good coverage. If she would ever deign to speak to me, I'd offer to take our younger one under my plan and she could go to cheaper 'single' coverage. As long as she wants to remain belligerent, though...

Originally Posted by RichieLion

Full Disclosure: Not every Tea Party Group is dead set against the SOPA bill. The largest group, The Tea Party Patriots, is totally against it, being a much more plugged in group, and not a small state organization. Lots of people don't see the big picture on this bill as you and I do.

Also, I got my Lamar's mixed up. The bill was written by Lamar Smith (R-TX) and a reported bi-partisan group of 12. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Thanks for the update.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

Each question asked whether you were for it or against it, basically and then how much of a priority it was. I think the "priority" aspect had a lot to do with each candidate.

Richie you are spot on the priority factor is actually the weight factor.

For instance in performance evaluations a person's job as a whole is at 100%.What is needed is to break out various taks as to their importance. for example the technical aspects of a workers job takes a heavy weight factor (may be 50%) than say keeping his manual up to date (may be 5%)

Richielion as another example take Obama for instance Campaigning gets a 60% weight factor, vacations 30% and running the country 10%