Shut 'em Down!

Crony capitalism is the liberal's baby. Corporate bailouts...both parties are equally guilty of doing.

..warmongering, well...I'll give you that >.>

hey! There are idiots on both sides of the spectrum....

Both parties do all three. If you want to disprove crony capitalism, do show where Republicans refused to engage in such behavior cause I want you to talk about Iraq then.

So its alright to force someone out of a state if they don't want it but not the country... got it... or did I miss a sarcasm tag? because yeah... its super easy for everyone to just pick up and leave their life because they don't like something lol...

Rick the *** Santorum was a frontrunner in the race for the Presidency. 'nuff said.

Well he is from Pennsylvania home of the Quakers which kind of explains his leanings. But rumor has it he is a fake that just hams it up for the target audience. But there was that one time when he almost called the President a Ni....say who remembers that scene in Blazing Saddles when the town realized the new sheriff was black?

In a fox news poll maybe...

For frontrunner for the republican nomination maybe...

But he couldn't even win against Mitt Romney his chances of being a real frontrunner for president were about as good as mine.

I didn't say that conservatives deal mainly on crony capitalism, but I do say that liberals do. That is all they know.

At least with conservatives, we know the difference between controlled and free markets...Better to find out if an experiment would work by affecting a very small portion of the nation instead of the entire nation as a whole. That way, if it's ***, at least you don't have to force it to those who don't want it, and you can stop the experiment and it would be easier to transition back to the older, better method.

Our's Nik, our's...

..except I can't run for president until 2020.

They all took turns with Mitt the Twit being the frontrunner for the nomination. It was like Mitt was constantly at 30%, and Santorum would be at 25, then Perry, then Ron Paul, then Cain, the only person that didn't spend any time sharing the spotlight was Bachmann.

*** Cheney, Haliburton/Blackwater, uncontested government contract bids, and the Iraq War say wtf are you smoking? and thank you for the blind support.

Because she's clinically HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE.

Oh wait, are you saying that the liberals in power now aren't doing that? Or should I say Solyndra, Healthcare.gov, uncontested government contract bids, and the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars? And add more to that list..

Everyone exaggerates for votes. The point is that he ran close with Romney and could have been the presidential nominee because the pool was so *** bad.

THE ANTI WAR GOVERNMENT NIG-UM. LOL

Rick Santorum is basically a 90s Democrat before the radical left wing took it over making him appear to be slightly Conservative. He was/is a big government Republican like Arlen Specter was and George Bush was and John McCain is. They are hardly Conservative. I suppose the hatred that liberals feel for Rick Santorum is his religion and his social stances. You should love hus big government ideas. Look at his record as Senator.

This is why they fear the Tea Party and people like Karl Rove seek to destroy it.

Edit: fixed spelling typing on meh stupid phone

I like how you don't understand the concept of crony capitalism and attribute it to things you know nothing about.

Nobody cares about Rick Santorum. Why is he even being discussed, his political career is over.

Aree you kidding me?

so you're ok with forcing ***down some peoples throats just to test the waters? Shouldn't you just adopt the stance that you usually take and say that they shouldn't force them to get a product either? It still doesn't really reply to the other question you were asked about it being conservative legislation all you did was say that its better to test it out on some than all...

Conservatism IS!


You don't know if they're in the black or the red either! If you're guilty of assuming they want to make money, you're right! There's nothing wrong with that. Why do YOU get up and goto work everyday?

They are players in the game whose rules are set by the government, don't hate the player.

Oh Karl Rove... what a joke...

Ok then republicans aren't conservatives... lol.. because they seek to control people in their own way... The only thing they're worried about at the moment is decreasing regulations for corps and getting people off welfare lol... and not by providing opportunites or anything just by telling them that they're lazy and I shouldn't be paying for you lol...

There is no assumption in a corporation wanting to making money, it is defined in the corporate charter.

what you say is weird since you seem to have a beef with the referee of the game aka the government.

I don't get up in the morning to start wars to make profits off the lives of American soldiers who have gone to fight a losing battle. Nor do I wake up to bilk investors or engage in bribing politicians to keep the public from knowing that SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE.

Working =/= crony capitalism. gtfo.

There are many businesses doing right by Americans, don't lump them in with the ***pumping greedy *** that would do you harm to see a small uptick in stock price.

You aren't listening at all... you read like one sentance and then just respond however you want...

I didn't say don't do it... though I do think it better if they didn't... but I said DO NOT BLAME IT ON THE ACA IF ITS NOT ACTUALLY DUE TO THE ACA... TELL THEM YOU'RE DOING IT TO INCREASE PROFITS... Does that make it clearer for you?

I know a lot better than you do... like I said I work in the industry... I see the practices first hand... I'm there for some of these conversations...

Also I think you skipped over Jass' personal experience with the misrepresntations...

If you want more money go for it... don't blow smoke up my *** and blame someone else for the change though... people are more likely to just eat it and move on if they think the company had nothing to do with it... less likely to challenge anything...

It is from the ACA though no matter how they spin it. The ACA deemed plans unacceptable. It made plans illegal the millions of Americans were happy with and paying on their own. The administration knew for years millions would lose plans and lied over and over that "if you like your plan you can keep it... period." HHS Secretary testified yesterday that even a deductible change as small as 5 dollars meant that the health care plan could not be grandfathered under the law.

Even caught in such a blatant lie I cannot believe people still defend him.

He's not agreeing with shoving anything down peoples throats. States are suppose to be where most of this stuff should happen. That way a smaller more local population can tune their own programmatic needs onto themselves. I live in MA, I don't particularly like our healthcare system but at least I have a more local and direct influence on it here in my state than I do with the ACA on the national scale.

I mean you realize you live in the United STATES of America right? 50 states each freely theoretically able to govern themselves to their own liking? Not dependent on a centralized power?

Actually, you do. As an american you were born with the original american sins of our forefathers including, but not limited to... slavery, extermination of indigenous populations, witch hunting, cross burning, train robbing, share cropping, monopolizing, attempting to assassinate fidel castro, ruining the middle east, nuking japan, killing Vietnamese people, I don't have time for the rest of the list.

Not only are you guilty of everything that has happened... You are also guilty of everything we are doing now and everything we will do in the future.

That's why all the real liberals move to paris! Je Ne Parle Pas Anglais!!!

/cringe

Mmmm...Have to agree with Mos. What an abysmal and narrow outlook.

/plays catch-up

States were given the option to run their own insurance exchanges allowing them to run it as they saw fit. Many states refused therefore ceding control to the federal government.

Unrelated note: Reliance on the sarcasm tags means you fail at humor.

Nonono I hear you just fine but you continue to plug your ears whenever I bring up the fact that the policies lost because they don't conform to the new standards represent a potential loss of revenue. You see it but you say "well those lost customers shouldn't affect the bottom line in the very least...."

How can you just ignore the effect that potential loss of revenue has on the entire company? The company has to plan to have less paying customers (that they wanted) next year than this one. You don't need to work at a 50 million dollar company to understand that .5% profit on 50 million revenue is less than .4% profit on 30 million.