The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.[W:409]

[Henrin]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

The right to life is provided for by the police and military system. Take those away and everyone from the little old lady living alone down the street to the young daughter going off to college for the first time will have that right taken away so fast all our heads would spin. We tax other people's labor to provide them, because we feel that's what makes us civil societies and different than the jungle.

So how are healthcare or education different?

Ahhh..no. If you're going to rely on natural right principles(which the UN is doing) then you have to base your reasoning on natural right principles. Under natural right principles inalienable rights by definition are not provided by government, but are consequence of our body. Even if you ignore that however the police does not create the right to life, but simply arrests people that act against the rights of others.

 

[jbander]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

So tell us how basic education or basic healthcare by government are fundamentally different. How is one socialism and the other not?

There is nothing in this country that is socialism of any concern , that's just the hate party bull **** about something they have no clue about

 

[jimbo]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

No your wrong, allowing by ,paying for schools that your hate party supports, is totally against the best interest of this country, we have enough blind hate already. The hate party also wants to dump all the demands that are put on the schools . so that the south wouldn't have to educate minorities , and allowing the hate schools to teach anything they want. Including the same hatred that drives you in the first place.

That is some rant. My hate party? I have no party. But in any event, I know a few people who send or have sent their children to private schools because it was in the best interest of their kids. Me being one of them. None of them spent the 20K because hate. More than a few are quite liberal.

Good post, though. You managed to include Republican hate, Republicans against the best interests of our county. The ignorant south, failure to educate minorities, private hate schools, and my hatred as perceived through your eyes. All in one paragraph. Mommy must be proud.

 

[ataraxia]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

Obama is Black, why do y'all always bring skin color in, he got voted in 2 times so I don't think color of his skin was the problem.
Funny how it's never the republican that brings race into the debate, but the democrats play the race card so much how will we ever move on from the so called race issues. Maybe if y'all stop bringing race into everything we could grow as a nation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because race is the elephant in the room. The reason Republicans don't like Obamacare is that they think by cutting healthcare to minorities and other vulnerable populations, they will be hurt more than themselves. If it benefits others, its socialist tyranny. If it benefits them, it's OK, right? So that's why you get those Tea Party placards "Stop socialized medicine and keep your hands off my Medicare!"

So that's why they hated Obamacare so much. But now, they are realizing it really will hurt them as much, if not more, to cut Obamacare. So that's why they are having second thoughts about it.

Trump voters would be among the biggest losers in Republicans' Obamacare replacement plan - LA Times

I am not making this stuff up. It's all documented and caught on tape. This is from an interview of Lee Atwater, chief Republican strategist for Ronald Reagan, in 1980:

Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry Dent and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now [Reagan] doesn't have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he's campaigned on since 1964 ... and that's fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster...

Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?

Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."

 

[ataraxia]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

Ahhh..no. If you're going to rely on natural right principles(which the UN is doing) then you have to base your reasoning on natural right principles. Under natural right principles inalienable rights by definition are not provided by government, but are consequence of our body. Even if you ignore that however the police does not create the right to life, but simply arrests people that act against the rights of others.

No, the UN is not basing anything on natural right principles, just pragmatic considerations of what creates more just and fair, therefore more stable, societies. There are no natural rights. In nature, the strong survive and thrive and they get to eat the weak and vulnerable for lunch. The reason humans created systems of civilization, law, enforced justice, and order, was because they didn't like how things worked in nature when just left free.

Take away enforced, tax-funded government protection for those "inalienable" rights, and they will get so alienable so fast your head would spin.

 

[jbander]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

ASSUMPTION ALERT! ASSUMPTION ALERT!

My father had private health insurance before and after PPACA.

Go...

Why is that a point of interest, Obama Care was to bring in People who couldn't afford Health insurance, but you want to have me pay for their health care. 21 million that have insurance now will need their healthcare paid for by my tax dollars after Scum Bag care is passed.

 

[jbander]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

That is some rant. My hate party? I have no party. But in any event, I know a few people who send or have sent their children to private schools because it was in the best interest of their kids. Me being one of them. None of them spent the 20K because hate. More than a few are quite liberal.

Good post, though. You managed to include Republican hate, Republicans against the best interests of our county. The ignorant south, failure to educate minorities, private hate schools, and my hatred as perceived through your eyes. All in one paragraph. Mommy must be proud.

We will tighten this a bit. the people who elected a hate candidate are haters and their party becomes the hate party. I hate them because they by far are the biggest threat to my country and have to be stopped. Do you think people love this countries biggest threats?

 

[Henrin]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

No, the UN is not basing anything on natural right principles, just pragmatic considerations of what creates more just and fair, therefore more stable, societies. There are no natural rights. In nature, the strong survive and the weak get eaten for lunch. The reason humans created systems of civilization, law, enforced justice, and order, was because they didn't like how things worked in nature when just left free.

Then they should watch the words they use because the words inalienable rights refers to a certain philosophy on rights that they are not following.

 

[Nuber]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

For the same reason we FORCE you to pay your taxes so we can have public schools, fire departments, and police departments. Freedom in civil societies is different than freedom of the jungle.

Running out of time this morning, this might be an interesting place to go (discussion wise) when I have more time.

 

[Common Sense 1]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

well, I can say without ANY reservation that you picked the WRONG user name because your post is completely void of ANY common sense

I did not say a single ****ing word about, "Obamacare"

Stop it......... This is what you said: "from what I can see it looks as if Don Cheeto Trumpsky is doing nothing more via his administration than attempting to undo Obama's legacy"

Obamacare is the only "legacy" for the Obama years! You are WRONG again. :lamo

 

[Common Sense 1]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

Scum bags press secretary said he was a pile of **** when she worked for another candidate.

Please try and get control of your self. Your emotions are over the top. The liberal naming calling
in full force.

Remember what Bill Clinton said about Obamacare: “You’ve got this crazy system where all the sudden 25 million more people have healthcare and then the people are out there busting it, sometimes 60 hours a week, wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half,” Clinton said.

“It’s the craziest thing in the world,” he said.

 

[Henrin]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

No, the UN is not basing anything on natural right principles, just pragmatic considerations of what creates more just and fair, therefore more stable, societies. There are no natural rights. In nature, the strong survive and thrive and they get to eat the weak and vulnerable for lunch. The reason humans created systems of civilization, law, enforced justice, and order, was because they didn't like how things worked in nature when just left free.

Take away enforced, tax-funded government protection for those "inalienable" rights, and they will get so alienable so fast your head would spin.

OH and btw, if they didn't want to refer to natural right principles then why did they use the word inherent and then use the words inalienable rights? If they meant to say rights are created by government then they sure did **** it up since the concept of government created rights doesn't state rights are inherent or inalienable.

Here review the line in question for yourself again:

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

 

[ataraxia]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

Then they should watch the words they use because the words inalienable rights refers to a certain philosophy on rights that they are not following.

Traditionally, "inalienable rights" and "natural law" refers to whatever a society deems "natural"- code for culturally acceptable or desirable to them at the time. The ancient Greeks, the originators of the philosophy of natural law, thought human slavery was natural law.

Aristotle describes a natural slave in his book Politics as "anyone who, while being human, is by nature not his own but of someone else…" Aristotle also states "he is of someone else when, while being human, he is a piece of property; and a piece of property is a tool for action separate from its owner." Based on this quote, Aristotle defines natural slavery in two phases. The first part is the natural slave's existence and characteristics. The second part is the natural slaves in society and how they interact with his or her master. According to Aristotle, natural slaves' main features include being pieces of property, tools for actions, and belonging to others.

They believed most "barbarians", by definition those who could not speak Attic Greek, were such natural slaves.

 

[Common Sense 1]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

Those are lies from the start.

Repeal ACA with not replacement and watch the GOP get it in the ass next year.

Only in your weird dreams! Obamacare was a major fail!

 

[Henrin]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

Traditionally, "inalienable rights" and "natural law" refers to whatever a society deems "natural"- code for culturally acceptable to them at the time. The ancient Greeks, the originators of the philosophy of natural law, thought human slavery was natural law.

Aristotle describes a natural slave in his book Politics as "anyone who, while being human, is by nature not his own but of someone else…" Aristotle also states "he is of someone else when, while being human, he is a piece of property; and a piece of property is a tool for action separate from its owner." Based on this quote, Aristotle defines natural slavery in two phases. The first part is the natural slave's existence and characteristics. The second part is the natural slaves in society and how they interact with his or her master. According to Aristotle, natural slaves' main features include being pieces of property, tools for actions, and belonging to others.

They believed most "barbarians", by definition those who could not speak Attic Greek, were such natural slaves.

So then, are you actually arguing for the merit of the case made by the UN or against it? If inalienable rights can mean anything whatsoever there doesn't appear to be any reason to take anything the UN said seriously.

 

[JamesBY]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

Only in your weird dreams! Obamacare was a major fail!

Nope, not at all.

 

[JamesBY]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

What loaded word?

Socialism?

ObamaCare was designed to fail and pave the way for "single payer" aka socialized medicine

So I dont think I have misused the term at all

Sure you have. You are quarreling to quarrel now.

The GOP has impeded ACA every way it can ensuring its failure, thus ensuring eventually single payer.

 

[jimbo]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

We will tighten this a bit. the people who elected a hate candidate are haters and their party becomes the hate party. I hate them because they by far are the biggest threat to my country and have to be stopped. Do you think people love this countries biggest threats?

I have no idea what you are claiming to say.

The biggest threat to this country was stopped. At least partially. Nov 8, 2016. More to come in '18. and then again in '20.

It does seem from your posts that the haters did not elect a hate candidate. The hate side lost.

 

[jbander]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

The hate party is opposed to Obama care for two reason, a black president an the fact that the people who are their controllers were charged for paying for it. Without their verbal hatred of Obama care, there would have been a majority of support. 5% added of more support would have made it supported by the majority.

 

[ataraxia]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

OH and btw, if they didn't want to refer to natural right principles then why did they use the word inherent and then use the words inalienable rights? If they meant to say rights are created by government then they sure did **** it up since the concept of government created rights doesn't state rights are inherent or inalienable.

Here review the line in question for yourself again:

You're right. I would not have used that phrase myself. But it tends to carry weight with the masses. I would rather appeal to pragmatic outcomes. If people are kept from the most basic human dignity by not having access to things like food, water, shelter, a basic education, or healthcare, when they are forced to face desperate situations which no human being should have to face, then the consequences are not just confined to the person suffering these themselves. The whole society becomes unstable and barbaric. I don't know what a "natural" ordering of society would be like. But I do know there are better and worse ways to do things. To have a society with absolutely NO social safety nets makes for a very dangerous and unstable society indeed. The question of what is or is not "natural" seems to be the wrong question to ask. It's like watching someone bleeding to death, and saying in these situations you need to raise their arm, apply pressure, put a bandage or tourniquet on, etc... in short, apply commonsense measures, and having someone trying to lecture you about what is "natural". Who cares? The person is hurting and dying and you have to intervene.

As you can tell, I don't buy this "natural law" thinking, although I think it's a nice thing to tack on to our latest best ideas on how things should be run so we can market them to the ignorant masses. Saying "this is the best ideas we have" is somehow not as appealing to their simple and unsophisticated minds as saying this is how nature intended things to be or what God wants. They won't bother to ask how we know that.

 

[cuban smokes]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

Stop it......... This is what you said: "from what I can see it looks as if Don Cheeto Trumpsky is doing nothing more via his administration than attempting to undo Obama's legacy"

Obamacare is the only "legacy" for the Obama years! You are WRONG again. :lamo

Obama has plenty of "legacy" that does NOT include ObamaCare but you can continue to act ignorant ............

 

[jbander]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

I have no idea what you are claiming to say.

The biggest threat to this country was stopped. At least partially. Nov 8, 2016. More to come in '18. and then again in '20.

It does seem from your posts that the haters did not elect a hate candidate. The hate side lost.

Profound comment , it's not me, it's you. its not me, it's you. No I didn't, you did. No we aren't, they are. No i'm not , you are. Real profound.

 

[ataraxia]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

So then, are you actually arguing for the merit of the case made by the UN or against it? If inalienable rights can mean anything whatsoever there doesn't appear to be any reason to take anything the UN said seriously.

Except the very pragmatic consideration that it makes for more safe, prosperous, socioeconomically and politically stable societies. I like what they are proposing. But the appeal to notions of "inalienable rights" and natural law philosophy are just lazy shorthand, or perhaps used for marketing purposes, and ultimately fall apart if examined critically in too much detail. Call it poetic license. It's meant to appeal to the heart. But it doesn't withstand critical scrutiny.

It's like telling a kid they must keep their room clean and not pull their little sister's hair because Santa won't like it. It works for little kids incapable of judging issues on their own merits. Ultimately though, the kid needs to be able to judge issues on their own merits. It's a more mature mindset.

 

[jimbo]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

Profound comment , it's not me, it's you. its not me, it's you. No I didn't, you did. No we aren't, they are. No i'm not , you are. Real profound.

So you have nothing more to add?

 

[Mac77]

Re: The level of hate that the right has for Obama, Is amazing.

Sure you have. You are quarreling to quarrel now.

The GOP has impeded ACA every way it can ensuring its failure, thus ensuring eventually single payer.

Obama and pelosi had absolute power to create any health system they wanted and republicans had nothing to do with it

What obama gave us was a turkey that could not fly and was never meant to fly