why did you even do that.

seriously if that's all you can find ahahahahah what the hell.

hey I guess that study I linked by those physicians who know what they are talking about and gain nothing by releasing sensationalist news was just liberal hogwash...

seriously what the hell man. you can't just link news articles and say it's indicative of any kind of trend. people die in hospital bureaucracy all the time. by linking a bunch of shit (and disguising it as this correlation) all you're doing is saying is that it happens. whoa, I thought everyone lived forever under UHC SORRY FOR LEADING YOU ON EVERYONE.

dr. house would never work under uhc...

So his skin color should have something to do with his political viewpoints?  How is that not a racist comment on your part?

no it means that if you're not white and you voted for Ron Paul you're an idiot.

if you do not realize the complete idiocy of voting a racist into office while being a minority you have horrible viewpoints and are stupid as shit. your viewpoints aren't determined by race but if you can't see the line there you shouldn't ever vote

heeeeeeeeeere's terin.

Steel, I'm amazed at your rhetoric.  You're right.  It's all propaganda.

And I went to go see Bill Clinton (in representation of Hilary) at my alma mater this evening.  It was kind of amusing.  You know how the thing went?

"We want <something>.  The Republicans and George Bush screwed it up.  <This> is a problem with our nation.  It is time for the Republicans' rule to end."

It was honestly just mud-slinging.  And I'm not saying Bush and other republicans don't.  But it's all the same.  Furthermore, it's amusing that Wildcat posts something, as do many others, in a very civil fashion and your response is

"LOL OMG WTF U FAG.  I M MINORITY FROM SHIT FAMILY CANT SUPPORT JACK SHIT NO REPUBLICANS HERE SO LIBERALS RIGHT ALL TIME  FUCK YOU DUDE.  REPUBLICANS RAPED MOM AND FUCKED DAD IN BUTT AND NOW THE ENTIRE WORLD IS FUCKED UP BECAUSE OF THEM.   WTF YOU IDIOT.  LOTS OF EVIDENCE"

And just FYI, it was amusing to find that I got about 5 IMs from people today who sent me an IM saying "Dude, Ryan and Steel are pretty left-wing, you should really watch about posting that stuff there.  But yeah, they're totally crazy and from low-income, low-class families in areas where they don't have any conservatives.  They act childish."

Just thought I'd share that with you, Steel and Ryan.  You talk big, but why don't you stop whining like a piece of shit and go out and do something with yourself, rather than spend hours a day posting on the internet.  I think that might further society a bit better, huh?

--Terin

hahahaha w00t.

low class!

I AM LOW CLASS AND LOW INCOME.

this is awesome.

I never thought I'd be insulted for the fact that my dad died at an early age and his medical bills crippled my single mother who thanks to right wing legislation could not get welfare, while her minority status ensured she wouldn't get a job that paid nearly as well as her white coworkers were promoted.

christ I did not think someone could say HEH BECAUSE YOU AREN'T WHITE OR RICH YOU DONT HAVE MY PERSPECTIVE ON HOW HARD LIFE IS.

ps: I live in North Carolina, easily one of the most conservative states.

pps: thanks to my apparently lack of skill and ability, I scored really well on the LSAT and will probably get into a top tier law school, and unlike your medical school buddies who apparently are so upset at having to treat niggers and poor folk, I plan on working the lowest paying jobs of criminal defense and civil rights litigation because, well, I feel like social equality is a good thing for someone to spend the rest of their life on. I also used to volunteer at a soup kitchen every weekend and still do when they call me, and my last job was helping a struggling civil rights law firm put together a law suit against a corporation who fired a man for having AIDS.

i dont do nothin i just post allllll day on the gw im totally crazy *reads marx in a coffeeshop with a scarf on*

ppps: hey fags who are IMing Terin, what's your names? why aint you backing up your boy in this topic? who are you? how do you know so much about me.....and my low class....

ohhhh, it's Samuel H. Invisible. my favorite member. am...am I shaking his hand right now Terin?

Steel, I'm amazed at your rhetoric.  You're right.  It's all propaganda.

And I went to go see Bill Clinton (in representation of Hilary) at my alma mater this evening.  It was kind of amusing.  You know how the thing went?

"We want <something>.  The Republicans and George Bush screwed it up.  <This> is a problem with our nation.  It is time for the Republicans' rule to end."

It was honestly just mud-slinging.  And I'm not saying Bush and other republicans don't.  But it's all the same.  Furthermore, it's amusing that Wildcat posts something, as do many others, in a very civil fashion and your response is

"LOL OMG WTF U FAG.  I M MINORITY FROM SHIT FAMILY CANT SUPPORT JACK SHIT NO REPUBLICANS HERE SO LIBERALS RIGHT ALL TIME  FUCK YOU DUDE.  REPUBLICANS RAPED MOM AND FUCKED DAD IN BUTT AND NOW THE ENTIRE WORLD IS FUCKED UP BECAUSE OF THEM.   WTF YOU IDIOT.  LOTS OF EVIDENCE"

And just FYI, it was amusing to find that I got about 5 IMs from people today who sent me an IM saying "Dude, Ryan and Steel are pretty left-wing, you should really watch about posting that stuff there.  But yeah, they're totally crazy and from low-income, low-class families in areas where they don't have any conservatives.  They act childish."

Just thought I'd share that with you, Steel and Ryan.  You talk big, but why don't you stop whining like a piece of shit and go out and do something with yourself, rather than spend hours a day posting on the internet.  I think that might further society a bit better, huh?

--Terin

you don't get to cut and run from this shit you little f*ck (for ASE). man up, you horrible piece of filth.

Keep it, Steel.  I read it a few times, read what some of the other people said and figured, "Not worth the fight."  So I knocked it out.  If you want to debate it, keep it up.  I don't care.  If you want to fight about it, go for it.  But that's your battle.  I don't care enough to fight with you about it, because I have better things to do.  And nobody is going to confront you because they have better things to do.

But my opinion stands.  You're a prick.  And I am as well for the response I gave you.

And I'm sorry your life has been so terrible and that you've been discriminated against *soooo* much.  Cry me a river, G.

You know, you don't need to have experienced those health care systems firsthand in order to know what they're really like, but you do need to conduct the appropriate research first. I'm talking about reading studies and finding out what the situation really is like in those countries, then comparing them to your own and then determining whether either has benefits. That's research.

You just conclude that you're right based on what a friend told you.

Then again, you don't read the links we provide, you don't listen to the arguments we make, and you say you'd prefer a libertarian president because that means "things would change". It seems that you're an emotional voter, one who has a very shallow understanding of things but will gladly agree with a person who campaigns his views as though they are obviously good. Does being on the side of Ron Paul make you feel better because his following is essentially a minority that acts as though it knows a lot about politics?

You know, I don't even believe you're a minority now. Maybe you posted pictures in the Picture Topic before, I don't know, but it just strikes me as extremely implausible that someone who isn't white could support either Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee. You'd have to be really ignorant of the history of the U.S., the world and your race for that to be true.

EDIT: then again, you also think that Noah's Ark could have existed, so I could be wrong about that.
Would you support an anarchistic president?

Why not? They're quite similar. They're not the same, sure, but on a lot of fronts, they are in agreement. Libertarianism is sort of like "anarchism done right". On which fronts do you disagree with anarchism, and in what way do you think libertarianism solves that disagreement?

Now, Dada, I think that insurance needs reform -- no doubt.  But if insurance becomes crappy as a result, as WildCat was saying, I think that we have a serious issue on our hands.  A lot of other countries like American health-care.  If, in the end, there was little difference in cost and everyone got health care, I'd totally be in.  Insurance providers do try to get out of everything.  That's a huge issue.  What good is insurance if they're not going to back you up?  $1,000 for a deductible sucks.  Especially if you're paying for some kind of special insurance.  My mother lost her insurance after my parents got a divorce, and she managed to find something that was decent enough and didn't screw up her checkbook.  Maybe it's a regional thing or something.  I don't know.

And an Anarchist president?  Why not.  It's crazy.  It's out there.  Hell, why not a Communist president (that doesn't make sense, since Communism doesn't have 1 leader, ideally...)?  The truth is that the President only has so much power.  The more variety we get in, the more difference there will be.  And ideally we'll have to pass bills that won't be too extremist in ANY form, so that EVERYONE can agree.  (or mostly everyone)  In that sense, we'll be doing something good for the nation.  So many people hate Bush and think he's done a poor job.    Why not try something else?  We've tried liberal and conservative.  Let's try something new.

--Terin

he called you g steel that means he identifies with you as a minority

Thanks for catching that.  I told you, I'm a minority.  Isn't it obvious?

--Terin

post pics to prove minority status.

So the color of my skin makes me a minority?  Does my religion make me a minority?  Do the color of my eyes make me a minority?  Does the fact that I have a penis, vagina, or neither, make me a minority?  If I even posted something, I doubt you'd believe me and say, "You stole that from a MySpace.  You stole that from a friend.  That's not really you."

Look.  I have a problem with racist people.  I also have a problem with people who go and throw that in everyone's face, without explaining a damn thing.  When someone makes a reasonable, decent argument, because they have their own opinion, you don't go and act like an asshole.  There have been plenty of people who were decent enough to explain things in a very civil manner.  Not everyone knows your backstory, Steel.  And I do apologize for the crude comment about your parents.  I have a problem with you.  It sucks that your mother had these issues and that conservative people screwed her out of things.  I don't disagree that such a thing is rotten.

Edit: Let me try to be a little more sincere than just "I apologize."  Look, I *seriously* apologize, ok?  I've seen both ends of the spectrum of poor/rich.  I was raised in a poor, penny-penching family, probably until 8.  There were lots of problems, not a "ghetto" or anything like that.  But there were drive-bys in that neighborhood.  Sometimes, we missed meals because we didn't have the money to eat more.  My parents barely got by paying the lease for the house they were "renting."  Then they did get lucky and signed on with a startup company that managed to do well.  And yes, things were better, we got out of that bad neighborhood.  And it was fortunate with my own health issues that came up in the following years.  I don't know discrimination quite in the same way you do.  I do know what it means to come from a poor family -- and I know what it's like to also be poor on your own because you have a jackass father who throws you out because you don't agree with the bullshit he wants to throw at you--one of the issues we argued about was actually racism, ironically.  One of many, ugh, there were a lot of others--I'm not saying that it was the only one as some "champion" against racism.  But still.  I didn't eat for days at a time, had to crash with friends, etc, because the jackass claimed me as a dependent and screwed up my chances of getting school loans to finish school, I had to borrow money from other people who I was fortunate to have in my life (and whom I've since paid back).

But I don't know you.  And when you flame, who's going to take you seriously?  If you're seriously going to go and be a lawyer, then why can't you make a reasonable, decent, civil argument?

--Terin

or just post a picture of you holding a sign with the word Terin on it.

or just post a picture of you holding a sign with the word Terin on it.

I could very easily ask a friend of whatever race, religion, or gender to do it.  So it's still not going to be honest proof.

Also, please note that I am sorry about the crude comment, and that's why I removed it, because I was dissatisfied at the statement.

EDIT: I'll get you guys a picture soon.  I need to borrow a camera then.

--Terin

or if you were a minority you would have I'M BLACK or just taken a pic

probably italian

ps no one here has brought up a single valid complaint against UHC that wasn't addressed in two links I provided earlier. why am I supposed to waste my time when you won't read it anyways!

Dada, agreed on the first part.  It's possible, but I'm really worried that it's going to get screwed up and hurt our taxes.  And if there's a transition period, we're all going to get screwed up for health-care in that time.

On the second, I just think that no matter what, the president will have to fit into a very specific role.  Sure, he (or she) may be a jackass at first and do stupid things (i.e. how Bush has been portrayed -- or I guess in most eyes, has been).  But in the end, they'll have to fit into a more moderate role.  I'd rather see someone opinionated (although not a racist, so I suppose Ron Paul is mostly out of the picture, unless he'd magically pump out some kind of an apology or deal with his crap) and different from what we have been seeing.  Bush was originally so pro-Jesus all the time.  We still recognize him as such, but the past few things I've seen him in, he hasn't been so preachy.  But, let me just give this as an example:

Bush shot down taking embryonic stem-cells, as it would destroy fetuses and he was anti-abortion, etc (ironic that Texas allows for abortion -- a law that I believe he let pass while he was governor).  It caused scientists to have to find alternative methods, and now, they've discovered a way of getting stem-cells from the donor themselves.  I don't think we'd have figured that out unless someone had stomped their foot down and said, "No."  Now, the donor has a limitless (or mostly limitless -- a lot more than a fetus) supply of stem-cells, and they're easier to come by.  So we've made "progress" in that regard.  And someone who can stand tall for something like that, get some bad flack, and actually do something positive -- that's important to me.  That's something I see as "good" with Bush.  Maybe there's another side like "Bush didn't do that," or something -- but from what I can recall and remember, that was Bush.

And Bush eventually stopped sprouting all of this Jesus jargon all the time.  He backed off of things, and he's kind of been a bit quiet lately, at least, from what I've noticed on CNN and Fox News.  Ideally, I'd have some other sources, but I try to get things fast because I'm busy so often. 

--Terin

Bush did not shoot down stem cell research so they could go ahead and find some other way of doing it. He did it because he found it perfectly acceptable that this form of research, which could one day make very great contributions to health care development, would get suffocated.

The fact that scientists managed to find another way to do it is not only miraculous, but also something you cannot attribute to George W. Bush. You make it sound as if he was right all the time. He wasn't. He gladly would have let this kind of research die out in the U.S., let's not forget. The very fact that he was willing, and able, to deliver a great blow to medical science, is what made that an extremely poor decision by him.

You say that Bush is moderate for this reason, but that's nothing short of ridiculous. (The reason why he's not been in the spotlight lately is because he's busy trying to polish his image as much as possible, which would account for his current Africa trip. He's not going to get all that much done anymore, anyway.)

I'm not saying that he had this in mind at all.  I'm saying that because he had the balls to go out there and do that (as cruel and unfair as it seems), it indirectly helped.  I think pulling stem cells from embryo's would be a bad thing (in my eyes -- everyone has different opinions on life, where it begins, etc).  I'd be worried a lot of people would find it more acceptable to just kill off life -- that one of these babies could grow up to be the next Einstein or something.  But you could at least agree that yes, as a result of his decision, we've found what could be considered a more responsible, morally "decent," method of finding stem cells?  We were forced to.  No, he didn't perpetuate these changes by saying, "Hey, look for other ways," because, yes, he more or less did just pull the plug on it.  But people found a way to get around it.  And now conservatives/Christians/etc can't say a damn thing about it.

And yes, I realize he's been out of the spotlight trying to fix his tarnished image.  I guess he's not so "moderate."  But maybe I just agree with what happened.  This is off on a tangent, but I feel like Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction -- just not in the form of nuclear weapons.  Biological agents, and all of the other crap that they found there, are serious problems.  Worse than Iran or North Korea, Russia, or somewhere else?  Probably not.  I feel like despite the problems with Iraq (I know I'm not there fighting right now -- and I'm not paying the bill for it yet), that it was the right thing to do.  Taking care of North Korea would be nice to do too, after seeing the type of shit they do to their people.  But that would assume a stronger "world police" role.  Which would be a pain in the ass and checkbook, for sure.  Maybe more so North Korea -- seriously, was watching a documentary and saw how they did "surgery" over there -- on fold-out tables that weren't clean, without antibiotics, and the people still say how their "great leader" is watching out for them.  I mean, at least he is pushing for them being self-reliant, but it still seems like they're getting raped within their own country.  Anyway.  Just my few cents on it.  I do worry a little that Bush was just trying to take out Sadam for the sake of his father, though.

@ASE -- my friend showed me that today, haha.  I'm totally about to hit the hay, damn, it's late.

--Terin

stem cell research was mostly supposed to be done on in vitro embryos that were destroyed anyways.

they were destroyed anyways

it has nothing to do with abortion or the preservation of life.

I feel like despite the problems with Iraq (I know I'm not there fighting right now -- and I'm not paying the bill for it yet), that it was the right thing to do.  Taking care of North Korea would be nice to do too, after seeing the type of shit they do to their people.  But that would assume a stronger "world police" role.  Which would be a pain in the ass and checkbook, for sure.  Maybe more so North Korea -- seriously, was watching a documentary and saw how they did "surgery" over there -- on fold-out tables that weren't clean, without antibiotics, and the people still say how their "great leader" is watching out for them.  I mean, at least he is pushing for them being self-reliant, but it still seems like they're getting raped within their own country.

Seems to me that the same kind of mentality that says it's time to "take care of" a nation is present in the people I overhear in public places saying "we shoulda just nuked the whole goddamn place... woulda solved all our problems" and in the people who believe that ignorance, bigotry, and racism are the best ways of "taking care of" groups of people with dissenting beliefs.