You cant make this stuff up......wait, I guess you can
- Thread starter CU1TruTiger4Life
- Start date
Im not a Trump fan ... BUT what he said wasnt racist. Ignorant? SURE ! ill advised? Most definitely, but racist?
Only thing that Trump proved over the weekend, is that he is a asshole .... and ..... we already knew that.
Only thing that Trump proved over the weekend, is that he is a asshole .... and ..... we already knew that.
It was definitely racist. Now that article calling him the most racist ever is a pretty large stretch since all of our early presidents owned slaves at some point.
I think first we need to agree on the definition of racism. I'm assuming that Merriam-Webster would be a good source for a definition, no?
Racism is defined as
: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
What specifically was racist about his comment?
Again, what he said was ignorant, stupid, insensitive .....but racist?
When everything is considered racist .... nothing is
So it was white supremacisty language which has connotations of racism.
He told 4 women of color, and no one else, to go back to the country they came from. 3 of them actually being born in the United States. The “go back to where you came from” is the most go to statement from racists.
His specifically targeting women of color shows that race is a component in this. His telling them to go back to their home country shows that he thinks they're inferior. The fact that he reserves this sort of criticism for people of color (and not his wife, for instance) further suggests that this is race related and not specifically related to immigrants (which we all acknowledge he's wrong on the facts on).
I feel like if you manage to semantic this about of being racist, you're on the verge of racism being a term of no use. There aren't that many people who are just going to say "I hate people of color" and they really shouldn't be our focus, anyways.
If illegal immigrants are his target like so many suggest, why didn’t he tell his wife to go back to her country? I’m sure we can all see the difference between her and the 4 congresswoman.
I see your point, but if you walked into a restaurant and saw some white, clueless dumbass like @CU1TruTiger4Life shouting at black and latino servers to "go back to the country where you came from!", would you not label that racist?
People read what they want to read. He said go back to your screwed up countries and “fix” them and then “comeback” and show us how. He’s being an asshole to 4 of the most hateful women on the planet that hate everything about this country and want to destroy it. Take up for somebody that deserves it.
Yes ... that would be racist, but thats not what Trump said .... or at least not all what he said. Full quotes and context matters.
Their country is the United States. So is he calling the United States screwed up?
And your last two sentences are the most hyperbolic statements I’ve read on here in awhile.
I usually agree with a lot of what you say here, but you are way off on this one. This exactly what Trump said to four congress women of color - "Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came." That is no different than a video of some white racist yelling at a woman speaking spanish in a store to "go back where you came from!" and then saying "trump will kick you out!" Just go to youtube for many of these videos.
Why doesnt he say that to Bernie? Or Joe Biden? I mean we all came from somewhere else didnt we? Shoot, Trump's own wife was an undocumented, working immigrant before she married his fat @ss.
Dude, Democrats and Republicans can and should disagree on how to improve our country, but if you think these women hate the country you have been sucked into the propaganda machine.
raised minimum wage
universal healthcare
reduction in carbon emissions to reverse global warming
You may not agree with those things, but others that do dont "hate" america, and they are certainly not trying to destroy it. They are actually doing their jobs, representing their constituents, who by the way are just as much Americans as you are.
Okay I hit wikipedia for Ayanna Pressley and she is against sexual assault. She wants to increase access to trauma and behavioral health services for survivors. That seems like a good thing.
She only wants that for non Americans bro. She hates everyone here.
I just dont see that as "racist". I see it as stupid, ignorant, wrong, hurtful and a billion other negative things, but racist isnt one of them.
Im not one to tell marginalized people how they should feel, but the rush to label hurtful speech as "racist", I firmly believe detracts from actual acts of racism and in this case give this orange gorilla more fodder for his f*wits.
As far as why he didnt launch his childish blabbering towards Bernie or Joe, I have to be honest here .... Im not sure what started it. Im assuming the 4 Congresswomen said something the night before, and Trump twitter vomited his derptastic thoughts the next morning.
Health care for all. I don't agree with their solutions to the problem, but the fact is that if you are poor and get in a serious accident, you are in debt for the rest of your life and no way to get out of it.
Renewable energy and climate change. Not a proponent of the Green deal, but this is the correct side of things.
Not taking immigrant children from their parents:
And most importantly.. legalization of Marijuana.
That's 4.
I always though that de-coupling health care from employment would create a competitive enough environment (like car insurance) to make prices competitive. But since I moved into an area in full swing of gentrification and everyone that walks by seems down on their luck and tells me "god bless you"... Man I don't know anymore where I stand
I've always tried to be a data driven guy, but I really feel for these guys. Health care for all.. It's one of those things you don't support until you meet the people it would help. Not saying I am convinced... but damn.. it makes me think.
Honestly - I'm all for health care for all, IF we can come up with a workable system that doesn't wreck the economy and tax everyone to death, and doesn't run off all of the doctors. Obamacare may have been a start but all I know for sure is that it cost some friends of mine their insurance (they had catastrophic-event-only coverage and the plan didn't meet the ACA standards apparently).
I hear from some that the Canada system is great, and some say it's garbage. It's kind of funny - in the "information age" I think we know LESS than we did before.
Last edited:
Obamacare has come up several times in this thread and I am genuinely curious about people's perception of something. These are the 10 essential benefits that (to the best of my understanding) are responsible for certain plans going away and for some premiums to go up. Are there any of these that people think that health insurance shouldn't always provide? For the sake of avoiding a semantics argument, let's consider it "health care plan" and not "health insurance".
- Ambulatory patient services (outpatient services)
- Emergency services
- Hospitalization
- Maternity and newborn care
- Mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment
- Prescription drugs
- Rehabilitative and habilitative services (those that help patients acquire, maintain, or improve skills necessary for daily functioning) and devices
- Laboratory services
- Preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management
- Pediatric services, including oral and vision care
The case I am familiar with was a teacher who had a "catastrophe" plan on his family and likely himself - all he could afford at the time (don't get me started on that). When I was unemployed I had a similar plan. It wouldn't pay to go to the hospital for the sniffles (the deductible was pretty high), but if you have a heart attack or something it kept the costs manageable.
In any case he lost coverage and couldn't afford an ACA plan apparently. I don't know what came of it but he was looking into one of those cost-sharing deals - or at least that was suggested.
Those plans (BCBS offered one, so did Fortis) weren't great. But they served a useful niche.
I will say that typically oral and vision care are separate plans (item 10) even for kids.
Last edited:
I believe short term catastrophic plans are still available. At the end of the day, though, I think the government has a vested interest in making sure people are getting preventative care and I don't have any problem with requiring insurance to cover that.
Sure but neither I nor the ACA suggested otherwise?
Sure...but practicality is an entirely different element.
Rationing is the only offset to limited supply. Further diluted by an expanding populace seeking these services in disproportionate numbers. Coupled with 3/4 of medical conditions being chronic illness due to lifestyle i.e obesity, smoking, drinking, etc.
I just retired from almost 30 years in the military and the VA system is exhibit "A' to support my claim that government can't make it work.
The populace seeking VA treatment is fairly constrained, easily forecasted over many years, and has lived fairly healthy lifestyles. I've been out 13 months and am still awaiting appointments. I know individuals who've waited 3 years for an eye exam.
Good luck with a population nearly 160 times as large who've lacked a regimented lifestyle.
Bottom line, show me it can work with the VA and I'll be more amicable to the single payer solution (not withstanding affordability).
1) The ACA is in no way a nationalization of either insurance or healthcare supply. To compare it to the ACA is very strange, to me. All I asked is what of the essential benefits were inappropriate.
2) I can't specifically disprove your anecdote on the VA but the overall data are in no way supportive of your statement.
VA wait times for new appointments equal to or better than those in private sector
VA Health System Generally Delivers Higher-Quality Care Than Other Health Providers
Most of us would be much better off if we had VA healthcare.
Whatever dude. ACA is the first step to single payer. That's the equivocation.
It doesn't work in the VA (strange that you would use the word "disprove" unless that is your sole intent).
Your links are laughable.
Experience trumps ideology. Give yourself a few more years.
It doesn't work in the VA (strange that you would use the word "disprove" unless that is your sole intent).
Your links are laughable.
Experience trumps ideology. Give yourself a few more years.
Perhaps I misunderstood but you listed it as one of your ten things that the ACA says a health insurance plan must include. I presume they allow an employer to use a separate provider for those plans since most places do that but you didn't say that.
Either way it's a small detail.
Usually people don't use the slippery slope fallacy to argue against something that's already happened. Novel approach, at least.
I provided links that say it does work in the VA. What I meant with the word "disprove" is that I can't objectively say your anecdotal experience didn't happen. So I provided evidence that your anecodotal experience isn't representative.
How so? Because they don't agree with your world view?
Facts don't care about your feelings? Am I doing that right? The only person who is falling on ideology here is you. You said that the ACA isn't good because single payer insurance is bad. I provided links to say you're factually wrong about the VA.
This site needs something to let me tag users as not being worth engaging with.
Your elitism is nauseating. Everything I posted is experience--not a "world view".
Slippery slope is not intended. Although, it would not have been left up to the SCOTUS to validate a tax hike if it were the innocuous construct which you pretend. And, it would have been created in a bi-partisan manner--much like the highly successful legislative acts which this country has relied.
I spent an entire professional career being apolitical. I supported, without hesitation, every administration due to duty. I did not venture into the extremes of either side. Your "worldview" is extreme in my opinion. But whatever, that's your right.
This country was founded upon compromise--something which I submit is neither plausible, nor tenable in today's extreme positioning; of which you're representative.
Additionally, show me where I said "ACA isn't good because single payer is bad." This country is the greatest country in the history of the world and our citizens deserve a level of healthcare--you'll notice I prefaced my original response to you with "sure" as in some level of agreement. You responded by telling me how great VA care would be for everyone by showing me links provided by the VA itself and a RAND study commissioned by the VA. Surely, counselor, you're familiar with conflict of interest. Your experience with VA care would be much more meaningful to this discussion.
Tagging someone because they are not "worthy" of engaging is the essence of narcissism. But, please carry-on.
Slippery slope is not intended. Although, it would not have been left up to the SCOTUS to validate a tax hike if it were the innocuous construct which you pretend. And, it would have been created in a bi-partisan manner--much like the highly successful legislative acts which this country has relied.
I spent an entire professional career being apolitical. I supported, without hesitation, every administration due to duty. I did not venture into the extremes of either side. Your "worldview" is extreme in my opinion. But whatever, that's your right.
This country was founded upon compromise--something which I submit is neither plausible, nor tenable in today's extreme positioning; of which you're representative.
Additionally, show me where I said "ACA isn't good because single payer is bad." This country is the greatest country in the history of the world and our citizens deserve a level of healthcare--you'll notice I prefaced my original response to you with "sure" as in some level of agreement. You responded by telling me how great VA care would be for everyone by showing me links provided by the VA itself and a RAND study commissioned by the VA. Surely, counselor, you're familiar with conflict of interest. Your experience with VA care would be much more meaningful to this discussion.
Tagging someone because they are not "worthy" of engaging is the essence of narcissism. But, please carry-on.
The ACA was a compromise. It was extremely similar to what Romney did in Massachusetts. I don't believe there is anything that could have passed in a bipartisan manner in that context but feel free to show me a sincere proposal that had GOP support in 2009/2010.[/quote]
I don't believe I expressed a world view? Just asked a question about the ACA (which you didn't even attempt to answer) and challenged your views on the VA.
"Whatever dude. ACA is the first step to single payer. That's the equivocation." You made some vague reference to rationing of care and this statement. That's about all you said about the ACA.
You may have said "sure" but you also completely ignored my question and answered one that wasn't asked. I'm not sure how you wanted me to respond.
I completely disagree that my experience with the VA is relevant to the discussion but since you insist. My wife work at the VA. The amount that they have to bend over backwards to cater towards patients is completely absurd and the level of care they receive is great. If anything, the vets themselves need dramatically more accountability. There is NO penalty for a vet missing an appointment. If you want to improve wait times, start there.
Still, I prefer actual data. New sources for you:
V.A. Wait Times Now Shorter Than for Private Doctors
NCBI:
100% agree with your assessment of Trump being an asshole.
Love. It. It's about, damn time.
An asshole that is trying to achieve outcomes that benefit America and Americans.
its racist. it really really is. Its ok to separate the person from the statements. The statements are fvcking racist.
To echo what others and betters than me have said its a call back to go back to where you come from. Trump is betting that the dogma of the right will react defensively to anything he says with liek a reptile brain reflex, thus the right is now actively defending racist statements. Why? Because being labeled a racist is like THE WORST THING EVER and our leader can't possibly be racist. Its weird but the group think is working. Its the party of Trump now, he knows it and he's creating a distraction so we don't all talk about the boarder or Epstein's accuser naming Trump as molesting her.
To build off your statement. Telling someone to "if you don't like it you can leave" is the epitome of nationalism, not patriotism. One of those is blind and the other is informed.
Latest posts
-
-
-
Why isn’t the Baseball Game against Coastal Carolina being made up?- Latest: MaxCalifornia
-
-
