Englebert

I've heard commentators asking the Obamacare supporters if Obamacare is so good, why is it so unpopular. Their answers basically all say the same thing...because the American people are so stupid we have to tell them what is good for them. It is unpopular because of the messaging...and Republican obstructionism (when Democrats owned both Houses and the White House). I've heard supporters of Obamacare say Congress was exempted because they already have good healthcare. Obamacare is designed for the poor and those that couldn't get healthcare otherwise, therefore is not needed for Congress and their staffers. It is one of the lamest excuses I've ever heard. We should repeal Obamacare and then require all that voted for it that you now must get your healthcare through the non-existent exchange. That would be karma at it's finest.

I don't care what pot you fall under. If you want to try to dictate how I live my life with a superior, condescending and belligerent attitude, then I will label you a Liberal. If not, I don't care to label you at all. I mentioned the Civil War because the same attitude I espoused was the same attitude that brought us into the war. That same sentiment is growing, but not just in the southern states, but in the majority of middle America and most of rural America. This sentiment is why I support secession...again. The constant berating by Liberal groups is comical. But when the government gets involved and starts dictating through laws and executive orders, then it becomes a tad bit more serious. I'm a little more hopeful that these little Nazi wanna-be groups will be quelled after there abysmal showing in the last election, but I'm not optimistic the government is going to take their boot off of the citizen's neck either. What about Davis? I couldn't remember who he was and had to do a Bing search. I've heard of him but know very little about him. So my opinion of him is that of no opinion. What leading point are you trying to make by that question?

If you think it fails the sniff test then you probably hold the same prejudicial views as the Liberals. I thought you said you did a lot of studying on the Civil War?

You are asking me to not pile everyone into a group while you explain what constitutes your groups. Wow. And my answer was exactly that, the explanation that though we are constantly accused of it, us White Southerners don't care what group someone falls into. We pretty much have two groups: those that want to live and let live, and those that want to dictate to us how we should conduct ourselves. We don't particularly care for the second group, no matter skin-color, ethnic background or geographic location.

Based on that rant, you seem to spend a lot of time worrying about racial ethnic groups. Seems you look at situations in the eyes of skin color or ethic background. That's exactly what the Liberals accuse all White folks of doing. Most of us red-neck, Black-hating, Mexican-hating, racists, bible-thumping, gun-clinging klansmen don't particularly give a damn about ethnic makeup. Frankly, we would like to be left alone to live our lives as we see fit without the government dictating to us how that should be accomplished. And we can definitely do without the elitist Liberals projecting their own racist views upon us. Simple as that.

If you want to spin it that way. I believe I have the correct interpretation. Either way, you are calling people that disagree with Obama's policies either racist or prejudice. Both are highly insulting and tiresome.

Try and spin it all you want, but you called everyone that disagrees with Obama's policies a racist. A racist is someone that believes his race is superior to all or another race. By saying one disagrees with Obama because he looks different is implying that one can't agree with someone that is from a race that they deem inferior.

So saying that people who disagree with Obama's policies and presidential performance do so because of his looks is not calling those people racist in your mind?

If you are going to use, own it. Most people on this board have become pretty adept at recognizing the race card when used and have become jaded. After all, we pretty much get called racist on a daily basis.

That's the only response I could come up with.

You were giving the opportunity to outline policies by Cruz that are disagreeable. You failed.

So throwing the race card is your attempt at trying to justify Obama's legacy. He is the worst president ever, and a different thread on this forum outlines just a few examples of that analysis. But hey, blame it on his looks. We already know you wouldn't vote for Cruz because of his looks. I guess to justify your predisposition you have to project those same faults onto others to rationalize your realities.

I'm waiting for the proposals for the government to get a refund for the "free stuff". Maybe it is time for the takers to start paying their fair share retroactively.

I hope it never comes. Just repeal Obamacare. Sounds like you have fallen for the wing-nut Liberal lie that Republicans have no ideas when it comes to healthcare. If you read your recent history, not from those secret history books you are so found of, but the real ones, you will find Republicans have proposed many ideas to overhaul Obamacare, and many ideas to create a new plan. Live a little and do some research. I'm not much fond of many of the ideas, but there are plenty of them. I was going to ask you to comment on the article posted in the original post, but can tell by your comment you haven't kept up with recent news.

Some could. Some would be wrong. This article is so extreme, I figured I would find some dissenting comments. When you deliver such out-of-the-mainstream ideas, the chances are 99% that you will find on overwhelming amount of retorts, much less at least one dissenter.

So you don't like his demeanor. The last President elected based on personality ended up being the worst President in American history. What is a Tea Party tool? If you are a Conservative, and the Tea Party represents Conservative ideology, does that garner you the label "Tea Party tool"? Does he perform some duty or espouse some position for the Tea Party that he is actually against?

Do you have any examples of some objectionable policies put forth be Cruz?

I didn't see any facts. I sure saw I lot of lies. The hate was immediately evident. I read some of the comments, and they were just an echo chamber of the author's views. It's hard to believe we have some people that are really this blind and consumed by hate.

It seems that is a perfect illustration of how wing-nut, hate-filled Liberals view things. Their views are so blinded by hate they can't even write a semi-credible article. The "when you're full of hate, project it onto your enemies" mantra is just so sad. I'm almost to the point that I feel a little sorry for them. If they weren't such hate-filled loons resorting to distortion and outright lies I might have a little empathy to their obvious mental disfunction.

I should have clarified better that I was creating a hypothetical, but wanted to be semi-vague for my follow-up. I got the follow-up in but can see how it was confusing. I'm starting to gain real confidence you're not ECO. He would have already blown up by now and revealed his true colors. Plus your spelling, punctuation and grammar are far superior (not that I care about that, just noticed the difference).

I'm guessing here, but I think you might have taken my earlier remarks for more than I meant. I said that I find the thought of socialized healthcare childish, simple-minded, deplorable and some other things. I actually don't believe that, I was trying to make the point that people can be far separated in their beliefs. Who is considered level-headed is probably going to fall with the one whose beliefs best matches "the beholder". It was not meant to be a personal jab.

How do you feel about creating safe zones (in or around their home country) vs importing refugees to the U.S.?

Again, I have no idea what you are saying. What do you mean by over-react. I just though we were having a simple little debate and I was simply making a point.

How many terrorists would you consider a flood? And there is about a billion more innocents out there. We cannot save the world by importing all of the world's needy.

If we dropped a nuclear bomb on a Middle Eastern country, regardless of warning, do you think this might come back to haunt us years later. Keep in mind the 200 years that have past since slavery when forming your opinion. I fully know that Africa was not a threat, but just keep in mind what that Middle Eastern country's children will grow up being taught.