So does that mean that Supporting a healthcare bill that your congressional party leader claimed "has to be passed to see what's in it", claimed it would allow you to keep your plan, reduce premiums and deductibles and provide more choice when all evidence is to the contrary mean that you're a moron and don't understand healthcare, Or you're an evil person that hates Americans that had Insurance prior to the ACA?
The evidence is not actually to the contrary, you just don't understand healthcare. By virtually all accounts the ACA is working quite well, and expanded insurance to millions of America while improve the insurance of Millions more. While some people have seen premium increases those increases are due mostly to three factors. 1.) the naturally increasing costs of healthcare which the ACA mitigated, but can't completely eliminate. 2.) the improved coverage they got under the ACA. 3.) The fact that millions of Americans chose not to sign up because they believed the bull**** propaganda of Republicans.
The fact that Republicans are incapable of replacing or even repealing the ACA today despite controlling both houses of congress and the presidency is proof how horribly mistaken you are about the ACA. You were fed a line of bull**** by Republicans for 8 long years under Obama, and now that they have to put their money where their mouth is they can't back it up.
You are wrong. It's time for you to wake up.
What kind of reasoning is this? Because fiscal Conservatives don't want benefits to go towards drugs and therefore tried something out that ended up costing more than expected they're morons or hate the poor?
You might be able to make this stupid argument if they had tried it once, and learned their lesson. But even after the obvious failures of the first handful of states that passed these idiotic laws conservatives today still keep advocating for them as if they're good ideas. That indicates that they're incapable of learning(stupid), or they just don't care(hate the poor).
Because Conservatives feel border security and some form of Wall could stem the flow of illegal immigrants, drugs and terrorists, and they advocate legal immigration to get that net positive you speak of instead of illegals, they're morons or hate Mexicans?
Yes, given the obvious fact that a Wall would not stem the flow of illegal immigrants, drugs and terrorists. Walls have existed for hundreds of years. So have ladders. About 40 years ago a Republican president demanded Russia tear down a Wall that was causing more problems than it solved, and now here we are today with Republicans in love with Russia, and building a pointless wall that will cause more problems than it solves. If that's not the definition of stupidity what is?
Please get a grip. Advocating a policy that doesn't have the desired result is not being a moron or hating a group of people.
It is when it becomes glaringly obvious to any sane rational intelligent person that the policy doesn't work, and yet you still continue to advocate it. That's the definition of stupidity. You're not learning from past experiences. You're making the same mistakes over and over again despite smarter people pointing this out to you.
Advocating adherence to the law is not being a moron or hating a group of people.
It is when the law itself makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and is designed specifically to disparage a group of people you hate.
Demanding adherence to our stupid immigration law is like demanding that we round up and arrest everyone who drank a beer under prohibition before we repealed prohibition. If the law is stupid get rid of it. Replace it with a better one, and then you can worry about enforcing it.
You'll find that if you simply replaced our immigration law with one that made more sense almost nobody would bother violating it, and you'd have a lot more support for arresting the few that did.
Evaluating Conservatives in this black or white way without considering any other motive or what their argument actually
I've given complete consideration to their motives and their arguments. Their arguments are stupid, and their motives are irrational and fear based.
It pains me to see this is what it's devolved into, blanket prejudice without civility or justification.
Prejudice indicates I judged you without listening to you. I listened to everything you said, and then formed my judgement. I also gave you a flawless justification for my judgments. It is the fact that you are either incapable of or refusing to understand them that cause me to ignore civility. I would be happy to be more civil with you allowed it to work.
