Regarding cannabis legalization Ann says, “Right now, I have to pay for, it turns out, coming down the pike, your health care. I have to pay for your unemployment when you can’t hold a job. I have to pay for your food, for your housing. Yeah, it’s my business!”
My question is, what kind of restrictions on behavior could you NOT justify with this kind of logic?
You can’t smoke because I pay for your health care.
You need to go on a diet because I pay for your health care.
You can’t own a gun because I pay for your health care.
You can’t drive a car because I pay for your health care.
You can’t work overtime because I pay for your health care.
All of these activities have been regulated through outright bans or heavy taxation by the cute little social democracies of Europe. Until recently FRISBEES and SKATEBOARDS WERE ILLEGAL in Norway because it was thought that they could lead to injuries that would cause unnecessary burdens on the healthcare system.
You can’t have ANY fun because I pay for your health care.
Ole' Ann sounds an awful lot like Barry O when she applies logic like that. Those are the very arguments the Liberals made to justify why the Federal government should be in charge of people's healthcare insurance.
She's not saying that, you can do whatever you want, just don't come crawling into the hospital crying for medical assistance for problems your purposefully did to yourself. Unless you squirreled away tons of cash and can pay for it yourself, then fine, but if you can't - stay home and die of your the death you brought on yourself... don't expect to live like an asshole and then expect everyone else to pick up the tab.
February 22, 2013 at 2:56pm
No. I think she’s a brilliant debater who occasionally underestimates the intelligence of her audience causing her to speak as if she were addressing a room full of pubescent boys.
February 22, 2013 at 2:38pm
I love Ann’s acerbic wit which explains why I’ve read most of her books. Having said that, I can’t help but notice that the weaker her argument is on any given issue, the more likely she is to cast aspersions regarding her opponents gender identity, i.e. “you don’t agree with me so you’re not a REAL man” or “you don’t live your life according to my principles so you’re not a REAL woman.”
She makes these kinds of comments so often that I really begin to wonder if she’s a bit obsessed with other people’s gender norms. Calling someone (or a group of someones) a puzzy because you disagree with them is the kind of language we expect from 7th grade boys, NOT from purportedly intelligent social commentators.
I understand that it’s all part of her schtick as a babe-a-licious conservative firebrand, but really, Ann, try using your brain once in a while ok? The argument that you have a right to tell me what to put in my body because you pay for my healthcare is EXACTLY the argument that the left will be making when they come for the remainder of our freedoms. Why do you think they’re trying to make guns a public health issue? Hm?
Whose side are you on, Ann?
Get your mind out of other people’s crotches and start doing a little critical thinking would you, please?
I agree with you. You can be a controversialist without recurring to name calling. Although I agree with Ann main points I disagree with they way she challenged libertarians by calling them names.
November 10, 2012 at 11:08am
Taxes go up. Taxes do not go down. They are renamed, repackaged, re-marketed. It’s a shell game. The portion of my income that has been going to the govt. has been steadily increasing my entire life.
@ MBE: His mouth is moving and noises are coming out, but spending is increasing. Actions speak louder and more truthfully than words. Why then should we care what he says?
November 10, 2012 at 10:54am
Uh… could this story possibly be subtly symbolic of the navel gazing that is currently taking place in the Republican Party? And could it be true that while were all engaged in this intense round of navel gazing, the world is crashing down around us?
There is no Benghazi in your navel.
November 5, 2012 at 11:20am
Seems odd: the map suggest there is no such category as Leaning Romney.
Here's a thought: do people get on TV to predict a "Landslide victory" for their benefit, or your benefit? If the announcer of the "Landslide victory" already really believes said landslide, then I don't see how them announcing it will make it any more beneficial for themselves.
What doesn't make sense to me is that if you really want a candidate to win, then you tell people they don't have a snowball's chance in hell, and not that they have it made. The way they are doing it is so that people feel crushed, sad, and unmotivated after Romney loses (after all you are a nation full of girly boys), and Obama will come across as the under-dog who won.
Ha! Good observation! The biased report can't even bring themselves to "leaning Romney" and instead calls them "tossup."
Very good observation - things like that are very telling of the political leanings of the people who created that map.
See the issue is that the U.S is a nation of girly boys who gossip like women (just listen to men at work), and you are unto the Revelation locusts that come out of the pit with hair like women. And people like Charles Krauthammer get on TV "It's gonna be close", but he says it for his own glory to show you all how smart a Quadriplegic can be, when he should be saying Romney doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell.
Because if the election system was real then Krauthammer would use psychology to get people to vote by telling you Romney has no chance of winning so you need to get the vote out. But the thing is that God knows the system's a fraud, and so Krauthammer's soul makes him say the opposite for his own glory.
People believe the election system is legitimate, because rule number one of arrogance is people serve their own glory.
ILIKEPEEPS....vawy vawt pithy......You really should stay out of areas you know nothing about...like anything to do with American politics, anything to do with the bible and anything to do thinking.....really.
Americans sell themselves crap-sandwiches, your own personal self is your own worst enemy. You're devouring yourselves.
ILIKETALKING...wtf r u ranting about? After reading your crummy posts, I feel as confused as an American watching another Obummer pep talk.
@ I LIKE PEOPLE
Tim, get back on your meds young man. You're freaking out the regulars on this site.
In one of his rants, ILIKEPEOPLE has a point. If you are wanting to energize your base, you don't do it by saying Obama is going to win in a landslide. That would make me not vote. By saying Romney is screwed would make me want to fight the lines.
I can understand how a less intelligent mind would think otherwise though and keep putting out that Obama is going to landslide this thing.
Could you argue that the person is just trying to do it for their own glory to gloat afterwards? Yes. But why would you want to do that? Liberals never do that and 80 to 90% of the time spit lies to the American public through the main stream all the time, why change now.
November 2, 2012 at 4:20pm
That’s OK Geraldo, credibility has never been your strong suit anyway.
I hear they have an opening over at MSNBC.
October 29, 2012 at 9:35am
Call or email the MSM and tell them to cover this story.
DO IT NOW!!!
October 29, 2012 at 8:55am
Call or email the MSM and tell them to cover this story.
DO IT NOW!!!
The lottery is a guage of taxation if you can afford to buy lottery tickets you are not taxed enough.
Much like the income tax, the lottery tax is voluntary.
How is it that someone on government aid is ALLOWED to buy lottery tickets..... oops, never mind that was the hope part....
This will sadly continue to happen as Obama and his cronies and redistributionst monkey followers continue the break the backbone of the American economy and try to replace it with a wish bone.
 September 29, 2012 at 7:14pm
Most of what currently passes for “atheism” is actually anti-theism. Atheism is the absence of belief in a divine creator. What we are seeing here is NOT just an absence of belief, but a rejection of any possibility of a divine creator.
In addition, it is more than common to find that so called atheists reject any mention, symbol, sign, speech, ritual, or printed material that in any way supports a world view that includes a divine creator. Anti-theists seem to suffer from an intense fear of anything that hints of divinity.
How illuminating that “atheists” have chosen a stylized letter “A” that is so similar to Aleister Crowley’s symbol. Old uncle Aleister might have gotten a good laugh at this! While he was known for his hatred of Christianity, he was also enough of a contrarian to recognize and enjoy the irony in a unifying symbol for “atheists”.
You so-called “atheists” are actually anti-theists. You suffer from a deep rooted fear of divinity. You totally reject the possibility that God might exist because his/her existence would render your current, self centered, narcissistic world view completely irrelevant. The existence of objective moral principles is what scares you the most… the possibility that you may be deeply flawed, wrong, and that you may one day be forced to pay a consequence for your immorality.
The first step in healing yourselves is to admit that you have a problem.
And you're not much of an analyst, either. Reject any possibility of a divine creator? We accept all possiblities. We simply have not seen, and no one has ever presented us, with any credible evidence.Here is your chance, prove it. Don't be afraid. Give us one iota of evidence, and we will verify it. You won't because you can't, and that is what ultimately irritates you, so you blame us for you being uncomfortable. We have no fear of divinity, because there is nothing so far to be afraid of. Only a handful of the 30,000 + religions in the world have this concept of "facing Judgement" from some scary sky guy, and those are the ones who routinely use fear to coerce gullible, weak people into coming to their building, with their wallets, to do man's bidding.
We need some kind of an obvious symbol to show our courage to do what is right. If 100 people see us wearing it, there are bound to be 10-20 people who are "on the fence". They may ask us questions, and we can try to help them out of their bondage, and wake up. Every time someone learns about me they are surprised I don't have horns and a pitchfork. That is the first lie we destroy.
The first step in healing yourself is to admit that the facts are out there, and that you've been misled by well meaning people.. But by all means, continue to believe whatever you want. It's still a free country. We atheists will continue to defend the constitution from people who would bend it to their will.
June 2, 2011 at 2:48pm
Romney is another Washington insider, a big govt. progressive with and R next to his name to confuse the gullible. I will NOT vote for Romney in the primary and I will NOT vote for Romney if he is nominated. I’m sick of compromising my principles for the lesser of two evils.
I will vote for anyone over Obama ... but I will work and support another candidate in the Primary hopefully TEA will prevail!
How is Romney a Washington insider? That doesn't make sense. He doesn't live in Washington, nor has he. He served for governor of his state for one term, and the rest of his life has been spent assisting and running businesses in the private sector. I'm not sure you really know what you're talking about. I'd vote for Romney.
Ya because staying at home pouting is really going to help. You and people like you are the reason that Obama got elected. Way to go. . .
Pres. Reagan believed in a Big tent for the GOP not some party that has some ridiculous litmus test. The only way to win elections is to appeal to a broader range of persons and teach them conservative values. That is not accomplished by staying at home on election day because the party's candidate agrees with you on only 9 out of 10 issues.
Do you honestly believe that we are better of with Pres. Obama than we would be with Romney? Do you honestly believe that we are better having Pres. Obama than we would have been with McCain?
June 2, 2011 at 2:41pm
Nice. Gummint gives us a visual that shows us how to eat.
Maybe they can develop one that shows how to TWEET.
Make sure everyone in congress gets a copy.