Stats

Comments Posted By Will T

Displaying 31 To 60 Of 96 Comments

Is this the definition of cognitive dissonance?

How is that? What do you have that shows that?

I would like to see it.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 12:11 pm

I am sure they are but that doesn’t change the fact the government first said they needed x amount of money from you and then later came back and said the needed x more.

They not only did this once with SS they’ve done it over and over.

What makes you think that won’t happen with HC?

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 12:06 pm

Since it was used in a song by one person that makes it okay to use with everyone?

Try that with the N word. Let me know how that goes.

And anyway, he points out that the word has a negative connotation to it if you read more on his website.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 12:05 pm

Monk~

This link is for you.

http://zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 12:02 pm

Sure. You guys said that the debate is what is important and there is no place for insults here.

Then came the insults. Thus the hypocrisy.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:58 am

SS isn’t going away even if it goes broke. The government will just take more to fund it. That is the problem I have with government programs. They always cost more than the sticker price and somebody has to foot that bill.

Here is an example using SS

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/taxRates.html

Notice the amount the government takes keeps increasing? Why? What isn’t working out the way they originally though it was going to work out.

What needs to be fixed first is government inefficiencies and the inability to control fraud.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:54 am

Here is the problem with government programs like this. They start out with us contributing x% of our income.

Then there is a budget deficit for some reason. Now they need +x% more of our income to continue to fund this yet most of us aren’t seeing or aren’t going to see a benefit from it.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:49 am

I don’t want to discuss me. I am trying to help you all out.

You say you want to have an open, civil debate on the topics yet you want to use insulting terms.

How can you have an open, civil debate while using offensive terms?

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:47 am

Let us not forget what started this whole dust up. I pointed out the generalizations that pep used in his post and that they weren’t needed.

Then the references to “teabaggers” started to fly. If you don’t want to have a discussion on the use of the word “teabagger” then don’t use it.

You all know it that is an offensive term. Are you all going to be coy and say you aren’t using the term with the intent to insult?

Don’t use it and we won’t have to get off topic with it.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:45 am

In that case go give it a try. And when someone gets upset by your use of the term just let them know you heard it being used in a song.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:41 am

Were you offended when libs/progs did that to Bush?

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:34 am

Social security is a huge problem and whether I support it or not does not matter. It is going to insolvent, broke, no money before I get my chance at it so it is nothing but another tax to me.

Same with medicare.

When the government gets involved it needs to be targeted. Plenty of people have the ability to handle their own HC needs.

My biggest problem with the government getting involved is the lack of mechanisms to control overuse of the HC system which is something that I see as a driver of increased HC costs.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:32 am

And I apologize for pointing out the hypocrisy.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:26 am

Between you and I, deal.

But as long as I see people using the term then I will call them out.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:22 am

If I can show you one instance of one of them being offended by being called a “teabagger” will you admit that it is an insult?

I agree with freedom of expression and all that. That is not my point.

My point is you are trying to say that this site is about the debate. Well if it is then there should be no reason to use the term “teabagger”. How does that advance the debate?

You are all acting coy when you use the term like you don’t what the real meaning is behind it when you really do.

Tell me, when somebody refers to myself or someone like me as a “teabagger” do you think they are just using a general label or do you think they are also knowingly making an underhanded and sexual insult?

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:21 am

They did not and you cannot prove that.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:17 am

Being offended by the label “teabagger” is not new.

http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=&sc2=news&sc3=&id=89676

Notice the date on the article.

If your intentions are to have an honest, open debate without personal insults then I suggest not using “teabagger” to refer to those you disagree with.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:13 am

They don’t embrace the term. Many are actually offended by the use of it.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:06 am

Link it.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:05 am

You saying that you won’t use it does nothing to address the use of it by other members.

Are you saying that you don’t have a problem with other members using the term?

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 11:03 am

Provide some proof to your accusations and then we might have a debate.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 10:55 am

That term is not used by people in the movement. As a matter of fact they are highly offended by it.

You do know what “teabagging” means right?

But I see what you are going to do. You are going to decide what is offensive and what is not offensive.

My saying that I am offended by the term should be enough for civil people to stop using. How can we have any type of healthy debate if people are going to continually use a term that they know offends someone?

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 10:54 am

If that is the case then the term “teabagger” should not be used to describe any republicans, conservatives, or those involved in the tea party movement.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 10:47 am

IT would be hard since she is dead.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 10:39 am

As I said before pep, you can call me whatever you want.

Just don’t try to advance the idea that you are here to debate and have constructive conversations about issues that affect us all when all you are here to do is name call.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 10:39 am

But you do care or wouldn’t spend so much of your time on it.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 10:37 am

Lets have a debate.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 10:34 am

Seriously?

Pepe called me a teabagger. Is that enough for you?

I don’t mind if you all want to be insulting. I only bring it up because Monk told me that this site was about the debate and that the insults were not welcome here.

So far, that isn’t the case.

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 10:33 am

How is that misdirection?

I asked you if you agree with KevenSeven that the tea party movement is racist. Do you?

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 10:31 am

So now Nellie is concerned about people using insults.

Nellie, are you actually agreeing with KevenSeven that the tea party movements are racist? And with that, are you actually putting forth the idea that I should then find some sort of proof that they are not racist?

» Posted By Will T On November 5, 2009 @ 10:26 am