So if you felt I called you a troll, I apologize.
- posted
2 years ago
So if you felt I called you a troll, I apologize.
The back and forth is too stupid and tedious for my feelings to be impacted in any way. Anytime (the sooner the better) that you two want to give it a rest, that would be just fine.
Moving on?
Admission accepted.
Your reward
My reward is your admission of willful ignorance.
Bye Bye
Have a good day. Try to learn something.
Y'all are insanely immature... I don't understand why either of you care.
Again, we come back to your incredible lack of self-awareness. ...and your lying, for that matter. More evidence of your leftism.
:: usenet nod ::
Did you mean to reply to me? I don't advertise a political lean, but if I did, it would NOT be left..
Well, no, I thought I was replying to Markey. Sorry!
Sometimes threading doesn't (reaches a limit). Again, sorry.
LOL, Best to lean right vs. WRONG.
Maybe so, but I'll admit neither side is made up of "saints"... Put nationalized healthcare on the right (i.e. create a national healthcare system) and a I'll be a stronger advocate for the right.
Go over to the Washington Post site and read the comments on articles related to smoking, COVID, and other such topics and you'll see why there is opposition to government-provided medicine. Numerous people are calling for denial of medical treatment to people with COVID who can't prove that they always wore a mask in public, or to smokers, or to the obese, or to any other group that doesn't adhere to their personal view of morality. Essentially they want to use the medical system to impose Puritanism.
Now, I know you're going to say "it can't ever happen"--I wouldn't have expected transgender rights or gay marriage to ever get the traction they are getting, so I don't buy the notion that "it can't happen".
To my mind, a "national healthcare system" would try to eliminate "discrimination". I think of it as a form of insurance so that we don't have people with prescriptions they can't afford. For instance, this week I heard about a new chemo-drug that costs $56,000/yr. I understand that "opposition" you described, but I think expect that the overall benefits outweigh the overall costs. It is clear that "successfully defining morality" is a losing game, or at least one that would only come at the cost of freedom (such as is engaged in by a few communist countries that I can think of).
Well that's another issue. Why would it try to do that? Because the people who are pressing for it now are terminally woke? What leads you to believe that they will stay in charge?
What leads you to believe that that will be covered? Medicare doesn't cover prescription meds--you have to buy your own policy for that coverage. And don't say "Part D" until you have investigated it--you have to pay a monthly premium for that service.
There are those who would say the same about literacy tests for voting, to take one example. I do not favor giving the government more tools of oppression. We already live in enough of a police state.
You mean at the cost of "freedumb"? That's what a lot of them are calling it these days you know.
Why should I care about comments from idiots posting comments on the articles?
That's what I figured, I got a chuckle. All is well.
In the post-trump era, after the capitol insanity, I'd say I'm pretty well firmly in the center. Both sides are nothing but greed -- it's all about money and power. I have no political loyalty -- either party is just moving further and further extreme. No one is for the people.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.