Moore and Krugman piss on the ACA decision

[stupidicus]

121. wrong

it's not cool to you, but who cares?

I don't, because the issue it addressed is far bigger than some obscure poster that thinks my use of a mischaracterization had some kinda evil intent, instead of its use as an object lesson of sorts as hyperbole to bring attention to it.

Furthermore,

1. as any honest and reasonable deconstruction of my commentary would show, I'm in complete agreement with them. BY all means, show me otherwise. I would have thought that alone along with the question that followed my quotes, as well as my commentary, that it would be self-evident, and particularly after this. To think otherwise would be the same as "thinking" that I charged myself with "pissing" on the decision too.

Acknowledgement of and complaints about the flaws of the ACA are as important as its human misery-relieving benefits, because that's the path to providing more.

Keep pissing Mike and Paul.

2. I don't care what you "think", what I read was something very narrow and specific, to paraphrase or perhaps quote "some people just aren't happy unless they are unhappy" directed in a top post at those dissing components of the ACA in the context of the decision, meaning what but they're masochists or suffering some kinda mental malady. Does that read like a simple "difference of opinion" to you? To me it reads like deliberate insulting designed to achieve only one end goal, although some aren't happy unless they're trying to make others miserable.

3. In my meager experiences around here, if you make a post critical of BHO and/or the dems without qualifying it with how much you just love the hell outta them anyway (M&Ks saving grace no doubt with the ACA), what do you get in response? I've read the "they're only criticizing the Kill list, etc, because they wanna dampen enthusiasm, cause BHO to lose, etc literally dozens and dozens of times here in my short time here posting. SUre, no one can have legitimate and defensible moral, legal, etc complaints about that or anything else, it always has to be something nefarious, and of course, they are all too stupid to be aware of the alternative in Romney, etc. Difference of opinion my ass -- that ends when the insults start flying, whether in the form of direct name-calling, or those of like kind to be found in innuendo of 25 words or less. The message is still the same, it's just that the direct name-calling is less if not entirely indefensible, and punished with far higher frequency, and is therefore avoided.

4. Whether they did or didn't "piss" on the ACA decision is a matter of opinion (despite the ease or lack of it one would have in defending that pov, which is a courtesy I've yet to see outta the "purists&quot whether it's one we share or not, not fact, which is why all the "purists" under indictment here get away with harboring their opinion they act upon in the manner described behind an unassailable wall of righteousness -- well, and the positive reinforcement they supply each other in swarms to the #3s, etc. To you it's just a "few Duers", but that doesn't fit with my observations, and without some verifiable counting and example keeping, it too is just a "matter of opinion", and not an incontrovertible "fact".

and if I could take a poll on the matter...

You don't seem to think a problem of this kind exists, so we can just drop it here, and spare me the further insults of insisting that you know what I meant and intended, and what I've experienced/observed while here. The only thing I meant, was to point out the hypocrisy of an alleged "few" DUers (despite there being dozens as I recall, that dittoed the message in the aforementioned Top POst alone), with the intended purpose of making the case that "pissing", if that is taken to mean ANY criticism whether qualified or not with whatever, is a good thing, if it is supported by the "facts", regardless of the subject matter criticized. Most here criticize things from BHO and/or the dems because they want to make them better, not to cause their defeat against our shared enemy, but if it makes you sleep better to think it's just a few that forget that, and that it has no negative impact for our cause for them to claim otherwise like in the case cited, then apparently you think such conduct unites, and doesn't divide as it surely does.

Let's just hope this doesn't result in being the proverbial straw that breaks their voting backs, no, given the level of disenchantment and disillusionment they must already have to be so focused on critiques as opposed to the praise our "purist" insist must always be in evidence, and attempt to enforce in the manner described. That's my concern, not whether some DU "moran" tries to impose anything on me.

And this isn't the only place I see this happening