Forum posts made by robinmaxwell760

Topic For you that voted for Obama...
Posted 09 Jan 2013 05:56

I'd have never expected him to do so in the first place, unless he was previously uninsured, though with his assets and income, that's highly unlikely.

Very unlikely, considering he and his family are protected for life by the best health care in the world... bought and paid for by the American tax payer (all 52% of us).

But think about it Lady X, if he and his family were on HIS health care plan it would take this argument away forever. But he's not. Humm.......


Topic For you that voted for Obama...
Posted 09 Jan 2013 05:51

That's flaming bullshit.
You don't even have to like the President or support him to follow simple logic. The health care act aims to provide a minimum for people who do not have insurance. A President, a congressperson, and a large portion of the middle class do not have need of its provisions, as they provide (with or without the help of their employers). The healthcare law does not ask or require those with the means to take that minimum, but it is designed to help those who currently cannot do so for themselves.

Like I said: Never question the President.....EVER!

Topic For you that voted for Obama...
Posted 07 Jan 2013 18:06

Well Doc, I hope you learned something...

Your question was very well written, asking an honest question, leaning neither to the right or left. Yet somehow you managed to piss off a couple of the Presidents disciples and have now suffered their wrath by being; chided, called names, ridiculed, had several aspersions cast at your character and been called a "hypocrite" even though you gave no indication as to your history in the question.

Do you have the real answer you were looking for? Did you get the answer to the question under the question you asked?

In case you missed it, the answer you no-doubt have come to is; never question the President...ever...about anything.

Good question tho, four years from now when it all kicks in many here won't remember ever being for Obamacare.


BTW: my answer is that if it's good enough for the least among us it should be good for the most among us.

Topic Romney appraisal
Posted 11 Oct 2012 09:53


There is no way the founder ever have a PBS station in mind when they wrote "General Welfare", they knew if things got to twisted that everything could be justified under the "general welfare" provision.

The "general welfare" the founders were talking about ment trade agreements with other powers, stability of bourders, coining money, improving harbors for trade. Not a Kermit and Grover sing a-long paid for by taxpayers.

If PBS is needed and viable then let it be fully funded by donations, no taxpayer money.
Romney just doesn't want tax dollars paying for it in these economic times, you are free to donate your little heart out to keep it going.


Topic Romney appraisal
Posted 11 Oct 2012 09:44

You should care.. its a major judgement error. A man that doest even realize mom jeans look fucking horrible on him wont see the forrest through the trees on other issues. He cant make the simplest of choices. Look at those fucking jeans. Its a joke.

Really kind'a creeps me out that you keep checking Romney's pants.puke


Topic Philly student ridiculed by teacher for wearing Romney/Paul t-shirt.
Posted 11 Oct 2012 09:34

I Have real bad news for everyone, the seventh seal has been broken and the Apocalypse has started.

MrNudiePants and I agree on something!!

More correctly, I agree with MrNudiePants. In My eariler post I lobbied for the teacher to be fired. The reason is if she didn't respect the position she had as teacher and believed it was more important to harass a student that was wearing a T-shirt she didn't agree with then she was in the wrong place (still might be ).


I going to change my position and adopt MrNudiePants's point that bad behavior should be made public. After all a scholol is where we send our kids to learn, from book or example, makes no difference. I could be a learning experience for the kids and the other teachers that maybe they should stick to the subject they are suppose to teach...that is what we pay them for.


P.S. sorry about those four hoursmen headed your bad.

Topic Philly student ridiculed by teacher for wearing Romney/Paul t-shirt.
Posted 07 Oct 2012 08:29


Good thread, glad you found this story. Im confused as to an NBC affiliate covering it, wonder if they are trying to find their credibility.


The little girl was ridiculed, humiliated and otherwise tortured and the little girl is the cunt?

If the teacher had not done what she did to the girl her job would not be on the line. But you would rather blame the girl for being the victim.

If the girl were wearing an Obama t-shirt and this had happened you would demand the teachers resignation. So would I, That's the difference between us. Wrong is wrong, partisanship be damned.

If a teacher, an authority figure does this to a student in a class full of other children based on the presences of a shirt they don't approve of on political choice, then this teacher will be much happier with life in her new job at her political party headquarter answering phone calls

Topic WARNING!!! POLITICAL!!!! DNC changes rule for party position against delegates votes!
Posted 07 Oct 2012 08:07

WellMadeMale; thanks for setting me sooo straight. It's so clear to me now that "fitst point of contact" and "moderator" are night and day apart! How the hell did I connect those dots??? I am so sorry for referring to you as a moderator, it will never happen again. Promise. I'm going to go get a fresh bowl of post toasties now.( that was so mature)

CoopsRuthie; you are wasting your keystrokes. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

Topic Romney appraisal
Posted 07 Oct 2012 07:50

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare , and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Lol.. What a twist! Wow spinning out of control! Using that line of thought the government paying my mortgage would promote the general welfare because I would have more money to spend on other things I want from society.

CoopsRuthie that is by far, hands down, without a doubt the wildest interpretation of that verse I have ever heard. Even the ACLU isn't as brave as that.

You go girl!


Topic Romney appraisal
Posted 04 Oct 2012 21:19

So, in other words, the outcome of worthless shares occur in other bankruptcies as well. Which means that those left with their investments wiped away is a separate issue from the government's investment, if I understand you correctly.

No, in these words; the government has no business bailing out company's that fail be they Wall street or Detroit. It's not the governments role. The difference is unions give big to democrats and wall street investors have no union. Somehow investors in wall street and Detroit lost but a union that didn't have a penny invested now holds 17% of G.M. No other words than those.


Topic WARNING!!! POLITICAL!!!! DNC changes rule for party position against delegates votes!
Posted 04 Oct 2012 21:06

If you ever felt I called you a fucktard simply because I disagreed with your point of view, that's not entirely true. I could have called you any other suitable yet disparaging adjectives, but for the sake of brevity and conciseness - I am fond of distilling it all down to Fucktard.

Most likely those people who you felt were slandering your sensibilities with those words you've shared above, were probably trying to find the correct label to paint on your forehead and keep themselves from touching another 65 to 120 or so lettered keys.

Please see above for all the reasons I typically refer to someone as being a fucktard.

If I disagree with your point of view and you're being a sexist, racist, homophobic, might get those tossed in as well. But if you're simply too lazy to use a spell checker (thinking it's our fault if we can't grasp what you're trying to say) or if you type the big two and three syllable words and are so damned sure you have the spelling right - that you refuse to check a dictionary prior to posting....

On a website especially which is all about writing, reading, editing, etc...

Then you sir, are...umm, oh yeah - a fucktard. (not real smart)

Please... carry on.

Mmmmmmmmmm...... I'm feeling all that love and tolerance from the left that I always hear about. All that uber compassion.


Was that just a lame excuse for bad behavior?


P.S. are you really a moderator on this forum? Really?

Topic WARNING!!! POLITICAL!!!! DNC changes rule for party position against delegates votes!
Posted 04 Oct 2012 21:00

Which is why you called me a useful idiot, right? Hypocrite. And the word you meant was except. There are adult literacy classes in California, I'm sure. Check one out.


Thought you said you weren't talking to me anymore?
I did refer to you as "what Stalin refered to as a useful idiot" in another post. I'm just surprised that you took it as "name calling" or an insult of any type. From what I read of you posts I thought you would wear it as a badge of honor. Oh and you caught another typo of mine, we are going to put a big smiley-face next to your name as the good little girl of the day! You're so very mature.

BTW, does "troll" count as name calling?


Topic Romney appraisal
Posted 04 Oct 2012 20:42

To me it's different because after all the original shareholder were told to "kiss it", the government comes in with taxpayer money, bails the company an the union out of their problem, when the dust settles the taxpayer is still owed billions, the union has 17% of the shares in a company they never purchased a single stock and the original shareholders get nothing.

It seems very different to me. Maybe if the government(Obama) had not spent taxpayer money it would be the same as any other bankruptcy. But it's not, the union made out, ma and pa America got screwed out of their retirement.

Topic WARNING!!! POLITICAL!!!! DNC changes rule for party position against delegates votes!
Posted 04 Oct 2012 18:20

One of the truisms about freedom of speech, I've found, is that the 1st Amendment protects freedom of speech, not freedom from backlash, counter-pointing, boycotting, and general angst as a result of your protected free speech . For instance, the Dixie Chicks after they expressed embarrassment from sharing a home state with George W. Bush., and consequently, radio stations and tour companies steered clear of them completely. Sure, they're free to say those things, but they can't cry 1st Amendment when their free speech results in public outrage.

Would you not agree that such a phrase applies with regard to dissent within/from the popular movements you're referring to?

I would agree completely, no question.

I didn't agree with anyone that just wanted to call the Dixie chic's names, not much point in calling someone a name accept to try and marginalize that person. Bully them into going away and keeping their opinions to them self because your position is to weak to defend. But others have the right not to play their records. Never thought it was a good idea to express your political opinion if your in the entertainment industry because you're going to piss off half your audience.

I think the point I was making earlier and with my last post was the way an exchange of differing points of view many times cascades into nothing more than name calling like ...oh...I don't know....ummm oh yeah; "FUCKTARD" for no other reason than "I don't agree with you".

It's a lement that I've had for years and being a CA. conservative ( one of only 6 allowed in the state) I been called : sexist, racist, bigot, homophobe, facist, nazi, bible-thumping redneck (never got that connection but ok.) so many times by simply expressing my point of view that those words have no meaning anymore.

In conclusion; Just because The first Amendment gives you the right to call someone a flaming Jack-ass, doesn't mean that you always should.

I know you would agree at least with that last point.


P.S. I think "W" was embarrassed to share a state with the Dixie chic's, he was just too polite to say it where someone would hear, let alone infront of an audience. Not real smart.

Topic The New Mars Rover Curiosity
Posted 04 Oct 2012 17:32

what video? are you on a Commadore 64? there's nothing in your post (pun inententional).

Topic Romney appraisal
Posted 04 Oct 2012 17:28

Lady X


Heres your link;

I have a bad feeling it won't be enough or the USA TODAY paper is an obvious "right-wing" rag thats just on the side of the "greedy rich Republican investor". I sincerely hope I'm wrong .

Lady X you wanted "just one link" there it is, untolled BILLIONS shot to hell and retirees that invested a large portion of their lifes work in the good 'ol "blue-chip stock of G.M." left with stock brokers telling them they no longer have a retirement account and should start looking for some work. Brought to you by the U.S. government, owned and operated by Barak Obama.

CoopsRuthie, I distinctly remember you saying that when I reffered to you as one of Stalin's "Useful idiots" you charged me with name calling...I guess "troll" doesn't count.
Look forward to not talking to you again in the future.

Topic this is going beyond far and im calling out bullshit!
Posted 07 Sep 2012 23:44

RobinMaxwell760 thinks I'm talking to him because I wrote his name in a reply to a post by MrNudiePants.

I can reply to any fucking thing I want.

Ooooooo....."fucking" am I iritating you?

So does this mean your going to stalk me from afar... Always wanted a stalker of my very own.


Topic this is going beyond far and im calling out bullshit!
Posted 07 Sep 2012 23:40

Almost forgot, thank you for making my point.

Remember, your not talking to me because your offended so easily by glancing blows and harsh stares.


Topic this is going beyond far and im calling out bullshit!
Posted 07 Sep 2012 23:35

You don't really believe that RobinMaxwell760 has read the bill do you? How could he possibly answer your question? He gets his news exclusively from right wing sources, in this case that bastion of conservative bullshit The Daily News . I got my information from a right wing source too, of course, the Arizona House of Representatives.

The bill seems to say that an employer can refuse to provide insurance coverage for any procedure that he finds objectionable on religious grounds. It's hard to read "contrary to the religious beliefs of the employer, sponsor, issuer, accountable health plan or other entity offering the plan because the coverage is contrary to the religious beliefs of the purchaser or beneficiary of the coverage," any other way than it's written. It's a law saying that the employer has an absolute right to refuse you medical coverage for anything they, the employer, feels is morally wrong.

There is no other way to read the bill. I read it in English. For all I know the people at The Daily News read it in some other language. Their article was written in gibberish after all. That's the only language Jan Brewer speaks evidently. The people at The Daily News were careful to quote only Brewer's opinion on what the bill meant. Like RobinMaxwell760 they couldn't bother with the truth.

Here's the relevant article: Section B, AZ House Bill 2625.

Notwithstanding subsection A of this section,an accountable health plan does not fail to meet the requirements of subsection A of this section if the plan's failure to provide coverage of specific items or services required under subsection A of this section is because providing or paying for coverage of the specific items or services is contrary to the religious beliefs of the employer, sponsor, issuer, accountable health plan or other entity offering the plan or is because the coverage is contrary to the religious beliefs of the purchaser or beneficiary of the coverage. If an objection triggers this subsection, a written affidavit shall be filed with the accountable health plan stating the objection.C. Subsection B of this section shall not exclude coverage for prescription contraceptive methods ordered by a health care provider with prescriptive authority for medical indications other than to for contraceptive, abortifacient, abortion or sterilization purposes. An accountable health plan, employer, sponsor, issuer or other entity offering the plan may state religious beliefs in its affidavit that require the enrollee to first pay for the prescription and then submit a claim to the accountable health plan along with evidence that the prescription isnot in whole or in part for a purpose covered by the objection. An accountable health plan may charge an administrative fee for handling claims under this subsection.

Thought you weren't talking to me anymore since I refered to you as one of Stalin's "useful idiots"

Ah, I get it, you had your fingers crossed behind your back when you said it so it doesn't count. Because you would never go back on your word, right?


P.S. remember, you can't respond to this....

Topic Full bore bullshit now in the GOP
Posted 07 Sep 2012 23:29

hello2 This will, perhaps, settle the discussion... didn't.

Topic WARNING!!! POLITICAL!!!! DNC changes rule for party position against delegates votes!
Posted 07 Sep 2012 23:25

It wasn't the politicians I was speaking of, it was the rank-and-file American that gets slammed by their opposite number that I was referring to. We are sometime( as Oscar Wilde put it;) the devil of our choosing and hell is how we designed it(blatant plagiarism).

We beat on each other like NAZI brown shirts if one of us dares to voice a word of decention with the popular movement all the while claiming how we embrace our first amendment.

I so hate hypocrisy. Especially in the name of "freedom of speech"


Topic this is going beyond far and im calling out bullshit!
Posted 07 Sep 2012 23:11

Or... you could just answer the question.

Nothing I say is going to help you. Shield your eyes from the truth and be lead by the inferior of your choosing.

"I can only show you the path, you have to walk it"-Morphious in "the Matrix"

Good luck, pal. I'm not you teacher or parent, you're on your own.


Topic The late Reverand Moon - SugarDaddy to the Religious Right in America. wtf?
Posted 07 Sep 2012 23:02


Anybody want to talk about Warren Buffet or George Sorros and the BILLIONS they have poured into the democrat political arena for their own reasons?

How about;

Ted Turner- owner of Tuner broadcasting
Larry Ellison- owner of Oricale
Steve Jobs - owner of Apple (RIP and I will miss his genius)
China- financial backer of Al Gore in the 2000 election to the tune of 24 million.
Barbara Streisand and her fund raisers for democrats.
Hollywood and their untold BILLIONS for democrats.
Bill Maher who refered to Sarah Palin as a "cunt", 1,000,000.00 to Obama's' Campaign to re-elect.
(imagine if any right winger refered to Hillary Clinton in such a way?!?)

Just wondering.


Topic this is going beyond far and im calling out bullshit!
Posted 07 Sep 2012 22:35

Then how does he know that she's being prescribed contraceptives?

READ THE BILL!!! Don't get caught in the spin... READ THE BILL!!!

If you don't want to invest the time like I did to educate yourself here's a link that makes short work of it....I know it's Not CNN but it's a source that shows both sides, what a concept!

Stop running on the hyperbole and learn. Information is out there, you don't have to duck for cover because someone yelled " the sky is falling!"

Educate yourself without fear and become someone to follow because you are worthy of leading.
Be honest with yourself and don't follow the other lemmings off the cliff because they seam to know where they are going. Dismiss emotion and embrace logic, follow fact to conclusion and don't fear the truth. You will stand taller, be prouder and be be someone to emulate.. Not dispised as a parrot for others to afraid to be enlightened.


Topic this is going beyond far and im calling out bullshit!
Posted 07 Sep 2012 19:17

And why again should she be forced to share the intimate details of her medical history with her employer? Should he be able to fire her if he doesn't like the results of her pap smear? Where does it end?

She is not forced to disclose anything.

I'll say it again...READ THE BILL!


Topic Keeping Your Mouth Shut or Speaking what is on your mind.
Posted 07 Sep 2012 18:26

So, Country girl,

What did you say and who did you say it to....what happened?

"Inquiring minds like ours need to know!"


Topic this is going beyond far and im calling out bullshit!
Posted 07 Sep 2012 18:16

If it's not about conflicting religious beliefs, then what is it about? You yourself say that if the employer doesn't believe something "is right in the eyes of God", then they should be able to either fire an employee at will, or limit their health coverage to whatever the employer deems necessary. What if the employer is a member of that sect that doesn't believe in doctors, instead thinking that everything should be left up to God's will? Where does one draw the line? Following your line of reasoning, a person could get a new manager promoted over them and suddenly have no coverage for anything, from hangnails to heart attacks. Not only is that immoral, but it's just stupid. And you know that.

if a woman needs the pill to regulate her period, control flow or reduce cramping brought on by her minstrel cycle then the pill is NOT BEING USED FOR CONTRACEPTION! Therefore it's not a conflict with someone moral belief.

So many are trying to blow this out of proportion and fight the final battle right here when IF YOU READ THE BILL CAREFULLY, book it is so small it's not worth the effort thats being exerted in this thread.Sword Fight

The inactment of this bill will be so small and effect so very few the A.C.L.U. hasn't even picked it up on radar.


Topic this is going beyond far and im calling out bullshit!
Posted 07 Sep 2012 17:21

btw, my wife is on the pill because otherwise her periods are quite painful, and they were prescribed simply for that reason - tell me, can she expect to be covered or not? what about women who take them because their health dictates it, that getting pregnant can endanger their lives? what about women going through chemo and who are still sexually active, where their medication could effect the baby, or women with AIDS or other STDs? what is your stance on their right to BC coverage? this is an earnest question, btw

Yes, the bill state that exemption for medical reason if pills are needed as perscribed my a doctor for a medical condition other than birth control, your employer sponsored health can pay for them with no consequence to the employee work status. It's all in the bill.

Topic WARNING!!! POLITICAL!!!! DNC changes rule for party position against delegates votes!
Posted 07 Sep 2012 16:47

but I'm not sure that explicitly encouraging name-calling and verbal abuse is a wise thing to do. In fact I think it comes dangerously close to violating forum rules. I'm not admin (obviously) and I'm really not trying to throw weight around that I don't have; it just seems to me that legitimate discussion gets lost in the chaos of dickishness and assholery enough, without outright .......

It's called sarcasm.

Here in America it's ok to call out Republicans on anything, even things they don't say or do.
But if you call a Democrate out for something they did do, you will usually be attacked for it in a most vile manner. I am truly happy to see the post have not gone that way and have been quite civil.


Topic Can Romney/Ryan get elected?
Posted 07 Sep 2012 16:36

Obama said:

He would cut the debt in half by re-election, it's over 16 trillion up from 10 trillion when he took office.

If we passed the " stimulas " unemployment would halt at 8% and be 6% by re-election. Currently it at 8.3%.

Middle class in income would rise under his administration, It's fallen 28% in 3 years.

There are "shovel ready" jobs just waiting on his " stimulas package", a year after the package was passed he said; "um, yeah, those jobs weren't so shovel ready after all."

He has created or saved 4.5 million jobs. The New York Times can only find about 400 thousand.

We can unit now. We have a more division between class and minorities that ever.

He would protect our southern border. Instead he sued Arizona for trying.

He would close " getmo". Still open.

Be the most open transparent President. He's used "executive privilege" and "executive order" more in his 4 years than the evil Bush did in eight.

If he can't make his campaign promises good in his first four years then this will be a one term presidency.

...... Let us try to make that last statement correct and that way he will have kept at least one campaign promise.

The election is now Romney's to lose or win. especially after that flat speech the President gave last night.