• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2012 Community Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
The only way to bring costs down is to make everyone buy into the system, or else people with insurance will ALWAYS be paying for people without.

It's ironic that people are complaining about having to pay for other people, when that is exactly what happens when you have a country where 50 mil people don't have health insurance.


People are like that because they don't see the cost right now when they pay for people to get some form of care that don't have insurance.

With the ACA there's a system in place that the government created so now they can put a face on that cost. Before ACA it was more of a hidden cost and the average person doesn't get pissed about hidden cost.

Isn't that today?


Yep it's today.
 
So that was literally the only point she was making? About her friend not being able to afford the medicine and eventually having her ovaries removed? I had read about that part, but I assumed that she must have also talked about ''regular'' use of contraceptives given how Rush was calling her a slut and everything. That's sad that I assumed that just because this idiot was spouting his bull crap.
Here is her testimony:
http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/images/stories/Testimony_-_Sandra_Fluke.pdf

She did mention a married friend that stopped using contraception because she could no longer afford it. So a married woman using contraception is a slut?
 
I've noticed this phenomenon a lot in the GOP. I'm not going to deny that Democrats do it as well, but I just haven't seen it as much. They create this fictional person or situation, and then rail against that as though that were the truth. They rile people up to get their pitchforks against an almost fictional character. It's how Obama became a socialist.

Bill Maher rant on that exact topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRL9CI2G_T8
 
Rick Santorum's Frat Brothers Perplexed By Claims Of Cultural Oppression

r-SANTORUM-large570.jpg


s-SANTORUM-large.jpg


"I’ve gone through it," Santorum explained. "I went through it at Penn State. You talk to most kids who go to college who are conservatives, and you are singled out, you are ridiculed, you are -- I can tell you personally, I know that, you know, we -- I went through a process where I was docked for my conservative views. ”
Santorum's fraternity brothers were fairly shocked by their friend's assertions.

Was there any kind of oppression at the frat house? "Not the group that I hung with," Elliehausen says.

"I wasn't aware of any oppression of any sort," Vondercrone says. "He seemed like a happy guy."
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
White House pushes online privacy bill of rights
By David Goldman @CNNMoneyTech February 23, 2012: 11:43 AM ET



cyber-security.ju.top.jpg





NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The Obama administration on Thursday unveiled a new online bill of rights intended to protect consumers' privacy when they surf the Web.
The policy lays out a set of guidelines for Internet companies about how they should treat consumers' data and manage their customer interactions. It stresses transparency, security, and user control of their data.

The bill is a splashy gesture, but it's also pretty toothless.
The document is stuffed with vague rules such as: "Companies should offer consumers clear and simple choices, presented at times and in ways that enable consumers to make meaningful decisions."

The White House admitted that its framework is fairly lightweight. It would like Congress to step up and lay down stricter mandates about what companies can do with their customers' data, but that's not going to happen any time soon.
In the meantime, the White House cast its bill of rights as a "comprehensive blueprint" for future legislation.

"It's not the end, it may not be the beginning of the end, but it's a very important step forward," Jon Leibowitz, chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, said on a conference call with the media held Wednesday evening.
The bill of rights is voluntary, though Leibowitz and Commerce Secretary John Bryson said they believe that corporations will be compelled to sign up as an illustration of their good faith.

For those that enroll, the FTC can enforce the bill's provisions by taking punitive actions against violators. Bryson said the administration chose to act now because of a rapid increase in online fraud and in customers' confusion about how and when they're being tracked. The White House first called for the bill of rights a year ago, but little progress had been made until now. "We need this now," Bryson said. "It cannot wait."

Alongside the privacy bill of rights' rollout, the Digital Advertising Alliance, a consortium of advertising networks, also announced Thursday that it is working to enhance its "Do Not Track" technology for most major Web browsers. DAA represents about 90% of online advertisers, including those in Google (GOOG, Fortune 500), Yahoo (YHOO, Fortune 500), Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500) and AOL's (AOL) ad networks.
For more than a year, those advertisers have allowed users to opt out of online tracking by installing a special cookie on their computer.
But administration officials said the current Do Not Track process is confusing and complicated.

As a result, the alliance said Thursday that it will push for a simple "Do Not Track" browser button. Clicking on it would opt a consumer out of data collection from participating advertisers across all websites. Like the privacy bill of rights, Do Not Track will be enforceable by the FTC.


The announcements come on the heels of a recent string of online privacy debacles.
Path, Twitter and scores of other mobile phone apps were recently found to be uploading entire address books to their servers without permission. In December, handset makers were caught installing secret software that could potentially record keystrokes. Last week, Google was caught red-handed violating Safari's privacy settings.
Facebook, Google, and Twitter have all settled with the FTC over past privacy violations, and are under orders to tread carefully to avoid future ones


####################


Not a bad start. And at the very least it shows that the government does have and should have a an interest in privacy rights when it comes to the internet in general. Now Obviously something like this wouldn't pass this year or even be worked on this year. But I hope with a 2nd term and a slightly more left Congress a Internet privacy bill of rights can pass in 2013.
 

Averon

Member
I've noticed this phenomenon a lot in the GOP. I'm not going to deny that Democrats do it as well, but I just haven't seen it as much. They create this fictional person or situation, and then rail against that as though that were the truth. They rile people up to get their pitchforks against an almost fictional character. It's how Obama became a socialist.

Voter ID laws the GOP are pushing is a perfect example of this. The GOP got their base believing there's mass voter fraud going on. The fraud is so vast and prevalent that new restrictive voting laws must be passed to save the country!
 
Romney Op-ed calling on Obama to look at Mass. for HCR

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20090730/column30_st.art.htm

Including...the tax penalty for individual mandate implementation

Our experience also demonstrates that getting every citizen insured doesn't have to break the bank. First, we established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance. Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages "free riders" to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others.
 

Tamanon

Banned
I wonder why it took so long for that Op Ed to come out, I mean, it's not like it was in some obscure publication. Are the other GOP Oppo groups that incompetent that they didn't have folks scouring media?
 
I seriously don't get it. Why are so many republicans coming out against Fluke despite having clearly not listened to her testimony? Her testimony was specifically about how hormonal birth control has therapeutic effects for a variety of medical problems, specifically ovarian cysts.

You'd think they would focus on how much of an outlier her concern is; the vast majority of women who use birth control use it for sex, just as the vast majority of abortions do not put the woman's life in danger. I make the comparison not because I agree with that logic but because it's where conservatives should have gone with this issue; tie it to abortion and point out statistics. Instead they're crucifying Fluke and it makes no sense. They're turning it into an economic and personal responsibility argument most of the country rejects

It's one of the most baffling freak outs I have ever seen
 
I wonder why it took so long for that Op Ed to come out, I mean, it's not like it was in some obscure publication. Are the other GOP Oppo groups that incompetent that they didn't have folks scouring media?

1. Paul has sold his soul to Romney so his campaign team is not doing any oppo-research
2. The other 2 campaigns suck
 

RDreamer

Member
You'd think they would focus on how much of an outlier her concern is; the vast majority of women who use birth control use it for sex, just as the vast majority of abortions do not put the woman's life in danger. I make the comparison not because I agree with that logic but because it's where conservatives should have gone with this issue; tie it to abortion and point out statistics. Instead they're crucifying Fluke and it makes no sense. They're turning it into an economic and personal responsibility argument most of the country rejects

It's one of the most baffling freak outs I have ever seen

Majority do, maybe, but I'd not be so quick to point it out as the vast majority. I went to a conservative religious university and quite a lot of the girls there were on birth control for completely other reasons including keeping their periods regular and less heavy. I was dating a girl for a while, actually, that would under no circumstances be having sex before marriage, trust me, and she was on birth control for those reasons.
 
hey Massachusetts gaf, what type of ads is Romney airing over there? just curious to see if he is going for the moderate or conservative vote over there
 

12STS

Banned
You'd think they would focus on how much of an outlier her concern is; the vast majority of women who use birth control use it for sex, just as the vast majority of abortions do not put the woman's life in danger. I make the comparison not because I agree with that logic but because it's where conservatives should have gone with this issue; tie it to abortion and point out statistics. Instead they're crucifying Fluke and it makes no sense. They're turning it into an economic and personal responsibility argument most of the country rejects

It's one of the most baffling freak outs I have ever seen

Could you provide us with the data that led you to this conclusion? Many teenagers take birth control pills to manage the intensity of their menstrual cycles (Honestly, a lot of adult women do as well).
 

Jackson50

Member
Per PPP

“Romney with a small lead on the first round of calls for our Ohio poll. Pretty clear the direction that one is headed in”
Send every registered voter a request form for a free ID. I read some states gave out free ID? Seems fine. Voter ID laws themselves are not pure evil, it's the not so hidden agenda behind them and the deliberate lack of measures to solve the problems that the laws could/can create which is the pure evil part.
No, thank you. Why waste resources mitigating the consequences of a provision that rectifies a contrived problem? If there were evidence of systematic voter fraud, then I'd consider it. Otherwise, the problem is a reactionary bugaboo.
hey Massachusetts gaf, what type of ads is Romney airing over there? just curious to see if he is going for the moderate or conservative vote over there
Is he even running ads? I imagine they'd be superfluous.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Well . . . I guess there are no more GOP primary debates. Wouldn't every other candidate go after Romney calling this a defense of "Obamneycare"? Has Mitt now started his general election campaign?

For some baffling reason, the other GOP dipshits barely attacked Romney at all during the debates, let alone for Romneycare. They had more than enough ammo, but they (rarely) went for the kill.
 
Could you provide us with the data that led you to this conclusion? Many teenagers take birth control pills to manage the intensity of their menstrual cycles (Honestly, a lot of adult women do as well).

he's right, while most women who use contraceptives do use it for more than one reason, a vast majority of them use it for preventing pregnancy. I think it's somewhere right above 80% use it primarily for said reason.

EDIT: Here's the study

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2011/11/15/index.html
 
Because calling her a slut feels better. And it helps to make her look bad if you make this all about selling your body to men in the street than about therapeutic and health benefits that millions of women recognize about birth control.

It's exactly why the GOP had that all men panel a couple weeks ago. Why have women talk about a problem that mostly affects them and not men as much?

Switch it so insurance companies have to pay for condoms only and watch the men really howl.

The Blunt amendment is stupid in that an employer can strip anything he wants from his employees' medical plans on moral grounds. Say someone did not like the use of radiation therapy and took that option away from his employees. Someone gets cancer and is now not covered for it.

Can you imagine a Jehovah's Witness boss not paying for blood transfusions?
 
interesting account from his college buddies exposing him for the pandering fraud he is today

I think there is a real weird psychological issue in Santorum based on his wife's pre-Santorum history. It is not really relevant to politics but it may explain where his views come from. Santorum's wife used to go out with an older abortion doctor. So old that the guy actually delivered Santorum's wife. So perhaps there is competitive hatred of that ex that Santorum flipped a bit and became this anti-abortion crusader out of a weird fight against that ex? (Santorum was pro-choice back then.)

Who knows . . . just strange psycho-babble.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/201...tion-doctor-abortion-clinic-abortion-practice
 

RDreamer

Member
I think there is a real weird psychological issue in Santorum based on his wife's pre-Santorum history. It is not really relevant to politics but it may explain where his views come from. Santorum's wife used to go out with an older abortion doctor. So old that the guy actually delivered Santorum's wife. So perhaps there is competitive hatred of that ex that Santorum flipped a bit and became this anti-abortion crusader out of a weird fight against that ex? (Santorum was pro-choice back then.)

Who knows . . . just strange psycho-babble.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/201...tion-doctor-abortion-clinic-abortion-practice

I kind of got that same feeling after that news story came out.
 

Jackson50

Member
I think there is a real weird psychological issue in Santorum based on his wife's pre-Santorum history. It is not really relevant to politics but it may explain where his views come from. Santorum's wife used to go out with an older abortion doctor. So old that the guy actually delivered Santorum's wife. So perhaps there is competitive hatred of that ex that Santorum flipped a bit and became this anti-abortion crusader out of a weird fight against that ex? (Santorum was pro-choice back then.)

Who knows . . . just strange psycho-babble.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/201...tion-doctor-abortion-clinic-abortion-practice
An analysis worthy of Phoenixdark.
 
I think there is a real weird psychological issue in Santorum based on his wife's pre-Santorum history. It is not really relevant to politics but it may explain where his views come from. Santorum's wife used to go out with an older abortion doctor. So old that the guy actually delivered Santorum's wife. So perhaps there is competitive hatred of that ex that Santorum flipped a bit and became this anti-abortion crusader out of a weird fight against that ex? (Santorum was pro-choice back then.)

Who knows . . . just strange psycho-babble.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/201...tion-doctor-abortion-clinic-abortion-practice

I had never considered this. Fascinating analysis there, and I wonder if we'll see more discussion on this in the more intellectual publications (the New Yorker perhaps)
 
I don't think it's unreasonable to inquire after what motivates Santorum's fanaticism, but I think the explanation is simply that he learned his lessons at Catholic school a little too well.
But that doesn't explain why he was pro-choice as an adult at some point and then flipped to being the anti-abortion zealot.

I don't think one can ever fully figure out what caused him to be as he is . . . but it is amusing to ponder.
 
Yeah, Rush is apologizing with a written statement posted on his website during the weekend news black hole.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...ent-he-called-slut-for-insulting-word-choices

He went on to add, however, "I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities."

That's some apologizing there.
 

RDreamer

Member
As I posted elsewhere, that apology by Rush is a crock. It's basically "I'm sorry that I'm not sorry, and I didn't mean to personally attack someone by personally attacking them... for 3 days." It just means his advertisers are really pissed at him now. Which is good.

Really, I don't think this country's political discourse is going to be remotely healthy while people like him (and O'Reilly) continue to spew misinformation and bring the discourse down to the lowest possible level. It's laughable that a troll like that is pretty much leading one of our parties in this country...
 
Holy shit, the fact that he apologized at all, in any twisted insincere form, shows that he saw the dollar signs leaving or someone told him off. Wow. Has he ever apologized for anything before?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom