Dems Fear Town Hall Meetings

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Steve I don't have a solution, the only person I'm in control of is myself.

But I see what you're doing here - its quite tragic how the only thing that can unite political partisans is for someone to attack the source of their partisanship.

None of this is my fault, rather its yours (plural). The question should be - what are you as free citizens of this country going to do.

In the context of political discourse in this country, that is your answer???

IMO, I think you let cynicism sometimes cloud your otherwise reasonable judgment. As much as you rightly criticize those who rely on corporate news for their daily ingestion of politics, I'd like to know what your sources are? Do you happen to read The Nation? American Prospect? I'm just curious.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I don't understand why followers like Steven, who beg to be dependent on the government, need to involve those like myself who don't want to be dependent on government in their hand out scams. Why can't you helpless and hapless folks just go hat in hand into individual dependency on your own rather than causing such a ruckus by trying to force everyone in the country into your personal misery against their will?

[GaryC 7]

I am opposed to all the of the government intervention that we are seeing. TARP, stimulus, bailouts, healthcare and cap and trade are all very bad ideas.

Food Stamps? Medicare? Social Security? Public Education? Public Libraries? Nationally protected wilderness?

Did I list them? Nope. Your usual MO Steven, take the subject and expand it to the extreme.

Well, naturally, if your premise as to why you are against Federal programs is because you believe that they do not and cannot work, it's not a stretch to ask which Federal programs you are actually opposed to. I'm sorry if that makes you feel cornered, but that's your ideology putting you in that corner, not me.

You are not putting me in any corner. You don't have that power over me. If you feel that taking questions to a really inane extreme to make a point is doing that then have at it.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't understand why followers like Steven, who beg to be dependent on the government, need to involve those like myself who don't want to be dependent on government in their hand out scams. Why can't you helpless and hapless folks just go hat in hand into individual dependency on your own rather than causing such a ruckus by trying to force everyone in the country into your personal misery against their will?

There you go again with your truth into taffy trick.

Social programs in this country can and do work. Government alone isn't the answer and neither is the private sector. It requires a balance of both, but extremists like you cannot see beyond polarized opposites. I'm for what Teddy Roosevelt was for among many other great leaders and individuals in this country. If you could take those ideological blinders off for long enough, you'd begin to find common ground with reasonable solutions that involve both public and private involvement. It's not an 'us vs. them' fight to begin with. That's your trouble.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I don't understand why followers like Steven, who beg to be dependent on the government, need to involve those like myself who don't want to be dependent on government in their hand out scams. Why can't you helpless and hapless folks just go hat in hand into individual dependency on your own rather than causing such a ruckus by trying to force everyone in the country into your personal misery against their will?

There you go again with your truth into taffy trick.

Social programs in this country can and do work. Government alone isn't the answer and neither is the private sector. It requires a balance of both, but extremists like you cannot see beyond polarized opposites. I'm for what Teddy Roosevelt was for among many other great leaders and individuals in this country. If you could take those ideological blinders off for long enough, you'd begin to find common ground with reasonable solutions that involve both public and private involvement. It's not an 'us vs. them' fight to begin with. That's your trouble.

Steven, you have posted long enough for anyone to know there is nothing balanced in your thinking. That you think otherwise is your problem.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I am opposed to all the of the government intervention that we are seeing. TARP, stimulus, bailouts, healthcare and cap and trade are all very bad ideas.

Food Stamps? Medicare? Social Security? Public Education? Public Libraries? Nationally protected wilderness?

Did I list them? Nope. Your usual MO Steven, take the subject and expand it to the extreme.

Well, naturally, if your premise as to why you are against Federal programs is because you believe that they do not and cannot work, it's not a stretch to ask which Federal programs you are actually opposed to. I'm sorry if that makes you feel cornered, but that's your ideology putting you in that corner, not me.

You are not putting me in any corner. You don't have that power over me. If you feel that taking questions to a really inane extreme to make a point is doing that then have at it.

Gary, you have said on many occasions that Federal Government is incapable of being able to do anything right. At least own up to your words or acknowledge reality that the Fed can and does have success with social programs. We can argue over how much (balance) between public and private, but you shut the door to any reasonable discourse over health care reform when you go with the premise that it couldn't work simply because the Fed is in capable of making work.

[GaryC 7]

I don't understand why followers like Steven, who beg to be dependent on the government, need to involve those like myself who don't want to be dependent on government in their hand out scams. Why can't you helpless and hapless folks just go hat in hand into individual dependency on your own rather than causing such a ruckus by trying to force everyone in the country into your personal misery against their will?

There you go again with your truth into taffy trick.

Social programs in this country can and do work. Government alone isn't the answer and neither is the private sector. It requires a balance of both, but extremists like you cannot see beyond polarized opposites. I'm for what Teddy Roosevelt was for among many other great leaders and individuals in this country. If you could take those ideological blinders off for long enough, you'd begin to find common ground with reasonable solutions that involve both public and private involvement. It's not an 'us vs. them' fight to begin with. That's your trouble.

Is that why Medicare and SS have a combined unfunded liabilty of over 100 Trillion dollars? Is that your definition of working?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't understand why followers like Steven, who beg to be dependent on the government, need to involve those like myself who don't want to be dependent on government in their hand out scams. Why can't you helpless and hapless folks just go hat in hand into individual dependency on your own rather than causing such a ruckus by trying to force everyone in the country into your personal misery against their will?

There you go again with your truth into taffy trick.

Social programs in this country can and do work. Government alone isn't the answer and neither is the private sector. It requires a balance of both, but extremists like you cannot see beyond polarized opposites. I'm for what Teddy Roosevelt was for among many other great leaders and individuals in this country. If you could take those ideological blinders off for long enough, you'd begin to find common ground with reasonable solutions that involve both public and private involvement. It's not an 'us vs. them' fight to begin with. That's your trouble.

Steven, you have posted long enough for anyone to know there is nothing balanced in your thinking. That you think otherwise is your problem.

I can always tell when you're stuck because you resort to making personal rather than actually responding to my argument.

[GaryC 7]

I am opposed to all the of the government intervention that we are seeing. TARP, stimulus, bailouts, healthcare and cap and trade are all very bad ideas.

Food Stamps? Medicare? Social Security? Public Education? Public Libraries? Nationally protected wilderness?

Did I list them? Nope. Your usual MO Steven, take the subject and expand it to the extreme.

Well, naturally, if your premise as to why you are against Federal programs is because you believe that they do not and cannot work, it's not a stretch to ask which Federal programs you are actually opposed to. I'm sorry if that makes you feel cornered, but that's your ideology putting you in that corner, not me.

You are not putting me in any corner. You don't have that power over me. If you feel that taking questions to a really inane extreme to make a point is doing that then have at it.

Gary, you have said on many occasions that Federal Government is incapable of being able to do anything right. At least own up to your words or acknowledge reality that the Fed can and does have success with social programs. We can argue over how much (balance) between public and private, but you shut the door to any reasonable discourse over health care reform when you go with the premise that it couldn't work simply because the Fed is in capable of making work.

See my question above. Does a 100 trillion shortfall on the two pillars of social programs sound like it is working?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't understand why followers like Steven, who beg to be dependent on the government, need to involve those like myself who don't want to be dependent on government in their hand out scams. Why can't you helpless and hapless folks just go hat in hand into individual dependency on your own rather than causing such a ruckus by trying to force everyone in the country into your personal misery against their will?

There you go again with your truth into taffy trick.

Social programs in this country can and do work. Government alone isn't the answer and neither is the private sector. It requires a balance of both, but extremists like you cannot see beyond polarized opposites. I'm for what Teddy Roosevelt was for among many other great leaders and individuals in this country. If you could take those ideological blinders off for long enough, you'd begin to find common ground with reasonable solutions that involve both public and private involvement. It's not an 'us vs. them' fight to begin with. That's your trouble.

Is that why Medicare and SS have a combined unfunded liabilty of over 100 Trillion dollars? Is that your definition of working?

Nice deflection. Okay - so the Fed can't do anything right, right? So go back to my previous question about other Fed programs you think we should abolish?

[The Dude 206]

I am opposed to all the of the government intervention that we are seeing. TARP, stimulus, bailouts, healthcare and cap and trade are all very bad ideas.

Food Stamps? Medicare? Social Security? Public Education? Public Libraries? Nationally protected wilderness?

Did I list them? Nope. Your usual MO Steven, take the subject and expand it to the extreme.

Well, naturally, if your premise as to why you are against Federal programs is because you believe that they do not and cannot work, it's not a stretch to ask which Federal programs you are actually opposed to. I'm sorry if that makes you feel cornered, but that's your ideology putting you in that corner, not me.

You are not putting me in any corner. You don't have that power over me. If you feel that taking questions to a really inane extreme to make a point is doing that then have at it.

Gary, you have said on many occasions that Federal Government is incapable of being able to do anything right. At least own up to your words or acknowledge reality that the Fed can and does have success with social programs. We can argue over how much (balance) between public and private, but you shut the door to any reasonable discourse over health care reform when you go with the premise that it couldn't work simply because the Fed is in capable of making work.

See my question above. Does a 100 trillion shortfall on the two pillars of social programs sound like it is working?

Where do you get those figures from? From what I've read, its a far smaller number. I'm not disputing the insolvency of SS and medicare, just the number that you posted.

[GaryC 7]

I don't understand why followers like Steven, who beg to be dependent on the government, need to involve those like myself who don't want to be dependent on government in their hand out scams. Why can't you helpless and hapless folks just go hat in hand into individual dependency on your own rather than causing such a ruckus by trying to force everyone in the country into your personal misery against their will?

There you go again with your truth into taffy trick.

Social programs in this country can and do work. Government alone isn't the answer and neither is the private sector. It requires a balance of both, but extremists like you cannot see beyond polarized opposites. I'm for what Teddy Roosevelt was for among many other great leaders and individuals in this country. If you could take those ideological blinders off for long enough, you'd begin to find common ground with reasonable solutions that involve both public and private involvement. It's not an 'us vs. them' fight to begin with. That's your trouble.

Is that why Medicare and SS have a combined unfunded liabilty of over 100 Trillion dollars? Is that your definition of working?

Nice deflection. Okay - so the Fed can't do anything right, right? So go back to my previous question about other Fed programs you think we should abolish?

Deflection? What deflection? Medicare and SS have a 100 trillion dollar shortfall and you call it a deflection? How can you say these two programs have been a success? Why would you want to give the government even more of our lives to throw down a rat hole like this? Do you understand what 100 trillion dollars is?????

[GaryC 7]

I am opposed to all the of the government intervention that we are seeing. TARP, stimulus, bailouts, healthcare and cap and trade are all very bad ideas.

Food Stamps? Medicare? Social Security? Public Education? Public Libraries? Nationally protected wilderness?

Did I list them? Nope. Your usual MO Steven, take the subject and expand it to the extreme.

Well, naturally, if your premise as to why you are against Federal programs is because you believe that they do not and cannot work, it's not a stretch to ask which Federal programs you are actually opposed to. I'm sorry if that makes you feel cornered, but that's your ideology putting you in that corner, not me.

You are not putting me in any corner. You don't have that power over me. If you feel that taking questions to a really inane extreme to make a point is doing that then have at it.

Gary, you have said on many occasions that Federal Government is incapable of being able to do anything right. At least own up to your words or acknowledge reality that the Fed can and does have success with social programs. We can argue over how much (balance) between public and private, but you shut the door to any reasonable discourse over health care reform when you go with the premise that it couldn't work simply because the Fed is in capable of making work.

See my question above. Does a 100 trillion shortfall on the two pillars of social programs sound like it is working?

Where do you get those figures from? From what I've read, its a far smaller number. I'm not disputing the insolvency of SS and medicare, just the number that you posted.

It is easy to find. Do a google search for "unfunded liability medicare" and "unfunded liability Social Security". Add the two numbers up. It is there for all to see and for some to ignore.

[The Dude 206]

I am opposed to all the of the government intervention that we are seeing. TARP, stimulus, bailouts, healthcare and cap and trade are all very bad ideas.

Food Stamps? Medicare? Social Security? Public Education? Public Libraries? Nationally protected wilderness?

Did I list them? Nope. Your usual MO Steven, take the subject and expand it to the extreme.

Well, naturally, if your premise as to why you are against Federal programs is because you believe that they do not and cannot work, it's not a stretch to ask which Federal programs you are actually opposed to. I'm sorry if that makes you feel cornered, but that's your ideology putting you in that corner, not me.

You are not putting me in any corner. You don't have that power over me. If you feel that taking questions to a really inane extreme to make a point is doing that then have at it.

Gary, you have said on many occasions that Federal Government is incapable of being able to do anything right. At least own up to your words or acknowledge reality that the Fed can and does have success with social programs. We can argue over how much (balance) between public and private, but you shut the door to any reasonable discourse over health care reform when you go with the premise that it couldn't work simply because the Fed is in capable of making work.

See my question above. Does a 100 trillion shortfall on the two pillars of social programs sound like it is working?

Where do you get those figures from? From what I've read, its a far smaller number. I'm not disputing the insolvency of SS and medicare, just the number that you posted.

It is easy to find. Do a google search for "unfunded liability medicare" and "unfunded liability Social Security". Add the two numbers up. It is there for all to see and for some to ignore.

Ummmmm.... thats why i asked where YOU got those numbers from. I did a search for it and the numbers I found were all significantly lower.

[GaryC 7]

Ummmmm.... thats why i asked where YOU got those numbers from. I did a search for it and the numbers I found were all significantly lower.

http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/ba616.pdf