socialist policies on both sides are leading this country straight into bankruptcy.

Clinton balanced the budget. It's not socialist policies, it's war and tax cuts for the top 1% that are bankrupting the United States.


Let's look at how stupid and hypocritical this is:
1. Video implies that Democrats respect the constitution. Oh, really? Is that why Obama voted for the patriot act and gun bans, both violations of the Bill of Rights.

Since then both Obama and the Democratic Party have supported removing the most heinous parts of the Patriot Act. Obama also supported an effort against telecom immunity in the wiretapping scandal. Neither Obama nor the democratic party has attempted to ban all guns outright, just certain types of guns. Don't forget to read the first half of the sentence in the 2nd amendment. The 2nd amendment is about maintaining a militia, and does not say you have to let every mentally ill person buy an M-249

Or how about joint support for easily inflatable fiat currency, in violation of Article 1, Section 10 which mandates gold backing.

Bullshit. It says: "No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."

The states are not allowed to make their own fiat money, but the federal government is allowed to make fiat money.


How about going to war without congressional declaration in Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo and others? All illegal under the same Article and section and all started by the Democrats.

Once again, Article 1 Section 10 is about restrictions on state governments, not restrictions on the federal government. You fail.



2. Video says abortion is about respecting a woman's right to her own body. I'm not even religious and it seems rather obvious to me that abortion is murder of inconvenience. Didn't want the kid? Why did you have unprotected sex? Furthermore, why is a being one minute apart, from womb to exiting, the difference between having no rights and having rights. That makes no sense. Life has to be defined at conception.

Which would you rather save, a conscious adult or a single-celled fertilized egg? The brain of a fly has 200,000 cells. Until the fetus develops enough of a nervous system to become sentient, its only rights are with respect to preventing suffering that might happen to it in the future after it becomes sentient. I.E., causing birth defects should be illegal but early abortion should be allowable for any reason whatsoever. Birth is NOT the single point where rights are granted; the supreme court has previously upheld a ban on late-term abortions (minus a few exceptional circumstances like saving the life of the mother).



3. Video implies that allowing drugs to be chosen immediately is a bad thing because they haven't been tested. Dude, that's against freedom. If you're dying of cancer, and you want to try an experimental drug, who the fuck cares if it's unsafe? YOU'RE GOING TO DIE. Government has no right to restrict you that opportunity to research and get advice from your doctor about it. And what about all the people who die during the delays that the FDA imposes on new drugs. How can those deaths ever show up in statistics?


You can get non-FDA-approved drugs by participating in the human studies required for FDA approval, which is exactly what you would be doing if you got an experimental treatment.

We need the FDA to keep the snake oil salesmen at bay. Selling bad medicine is not just fraud, it's often manslaughter.


4. Video implies that we should continue to block domestic drilling to prevent potential harm to some wildlife. This isn't a cartoon, drilling doesn't leave an area in shambles. Have fun trying to fly planes with solar panels and meeting our power needs without emission-free nuclear, recyclable nuclear, which you've blocked for thirty years with fear-mongering campaigns about shitty soviet reactors from the 70s. Have fun watching Bush starting insane wars in the middle east and begging Saudi princes to increase production because we have to import 70% of our oil from abroad because of these insane energy policies. Say hello to peak oil and $300 a barrel oil in the coming years.

Pelosi, Clinton, Obama Favor More Nuclear Plants
The anti-nuclear fear mongering is lessening as people realize that it's better for the environment than coal. It won't do shit about dependence on foreign oil unless people buy plug-in electric cars, but it will reduce our dependence on domestic coal.


You can't lower the price by debasing your currency to pay for 60 trillion in unfunded ponzi scheme welfare promises started by FDR, blocking oil, and blocking nuclear.


Sweden's deficit is 0.01% of its GDP, and France's deficit is under 3% of its GDP, while the USA's deficit is 4% of its GDP, despite the fact that both France and Sweden have much broader welfare programs than the USA.

If Bush's tax cuts for millionaires were undone, and the Iraq war (and "homeland security" pork) never happened, the budget would be balanced. (do the math)

>> ^coolhund:
Sad thing is, theres people that will actually vote republican after seeing it because they are ignorant idiots and dont understand sarcasm.


No, the sad thing is that uneducated historically ignorant people like yourself are so mired in this two-party duopoly with petty antagonism with one another, that they fail to see how socialist policies on both sides are leading this country straight into bankruptcy.

Let's look at how stupid and hypocritical this is:

1. Video implies that Democrats respect the constitution. Oh, really? Is that why Obama voted for the patriot act and gun bans, both violations of the Bill of Rights. Or how about joint support for easily inflatable fiat currency, in violation of Article 1, Section 10 which mandates gold backing. How about going to war without congressional declaration in Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo and others? All illegal under the same Article and section and all started by the Democrats.

2. Video says abortion is about respecting a woman's right to her own body. I'm not even religious and it seems rather obvious to me that abortion is murder of inconvenience. Didn't want the kid? Why did you have unprotected sex? Furthermore, why is a being one minute apart, from womb to exiting, the difference between having no rights and having rights. That makes no sense. Life has to be defined at conception.

3. Video implies that allowing drugs to be chosen immediately is a bad thing because they haven't been tested. Dude, that's against freedom. If you're dying of cancer, and you want to try an experimental drug, who the fuck cares if it's unsafe? YOU'RE GOING TO DIE. Government has no right to restrict you that opportunity to research and get advice from your doctor about it. And what about all the people who die during the delays that the FDA imposes on new drugs. How can those deaths ever show up in statistics?

4. Video implies that we should continue to block domestic drilling to prevent potential harm to some wildlife. This isn't a cartoon, drilling doesn't leave an area in shambles. Have fun trying to fly planes with solar panels and meeting our power needs without emission-free nuclear, recyclable nuclear, which you've blocked for thirty years with fear-mongering campaigns about shitty soviet reactors from the 70s. Have fun watching Bush starting insane wars in the middle east and begging Saudi princes to increase production because we have to import 70% of our oil from abroad because of these insane energy policies. Say hello to peak oil and $300 a barrel oil in the coming years. You can't lower the price by debasing your currency to pay for 60 trillion in unfunded ponzi scheme welfare promises started by FDR, blocking oil, and blocking nuclear.

I didn't know the CIA was making new drugs for Argentina.

The problem with firefighting vs health care is that it doesn't take a lot of education or money to be a fireman. Doctors spend thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars for there education and the tools of the trade aren't cheap ether. True, lots of money is wasted and extorted from people and that needs to be fixed. The main reason that it should stay out of the governments hands though is innovation. The US has more medical advancements because company's know that the more good treatments they have the more they can sell. The cost of development is huge and is not able to be sustained by the government. True, drug company's release drugs that are not throughly tested and that needs to change but at the same time they come up with so many new drugs that save people that 10 years ago would have died. In socialized medicine a doctor sees as many patents as possible because everyone gets it free, so why not go see about every ache and pain, and thus every doctor thats qualified is employed just seeing patents. This leaves no time for research or specialization and specialists are what are needed most. If your heart is about to explode you need someone who has worked on nothing but hearts for his entire career, not someone who treats the normal patents who come in off the street. Also specialists make the most new developments because they have such a intimate knowledge of their field. Canada and other country's reproduce new drugs from the US cheaply because no development is required, with a good chemistry setup and the right people any drug can be made for dirt cheap the only real cost is knowing what to make and how it will work. If a drug costs two cents to make per pill but the development cast was 1.3 billion dollars the money has to be made up, so that pill for the next 5-10 years is 2-25 dollars each. The money raised is then put back into making more new drugs. The problem is people don't look at it like that, they see that its a few cents to produce so they assume thats the only cost in its long production. Most people cant see it for what it is, an investment, if the money is not recovered at a profit then the cycle stops and nothing new will be produced, innovation will stagnate and people will continue to die form aliments that could someday be cured.

@karaidl ROFL qm acting....

Come on people.. Is anyone here really happy with their healthcare as it is? Does anyone else cringe when they see pharma ads on TV creating new ailments to be treated by new drugs? Do you like the idea of drug reps pushing their wares behind whitened teeth, pressed suits, and free lunches?

Are you trying to tell me that we've come this far and we can't ensure that EVERYONE on the planet gets treatment for what ails them?

Please! Just let the greed bleed from your souls, not the health from our veins.

Great sift by the way, the Larry King showdown is pretty good too.

CNN is another gangsta of the drive-by media and helps carry water for the Dems, so why are they arguing with Moore?

It's profit incentive that keeps US healthcare on top. We're the innovators; the socialist countries' nannycare wouldn't be half as good if it wasn't for our new drugs and tech.

If you want the same government that can't deliver the mail, secure the border or make the trains run on time taking a scalpel to your flesh...good luck with THAT.

Two words: Doctor shortage.

heh, I love this rhetorical device. The crazy thing about not wanting to fund stem cell research is that the government pays for 80% of all new drug creations, we are already disposing of thousands of stem cells a week. So if you prescribe to the ridiculous notion that we should be protecting zygotes why are you not going after the mothers and fathers who have hundreds of zygotes made in the process of artificial insemination, but ultimately end up using one or two. By the logic expressed by wumpus and others in this thread these parents are guilty of murder for daring to have one child, while the other hundreds die. Of course it takes a ridiculous rhetorical device like Hamfist's to point this out, but the reality is that we THROW AWAY thousands of zygotes a day, if they are actually people (cough cough) would their lives not be better served providing people with parkinsons, diabetes, traumatic spinal cord injuries, and others with hope?

For me at, least the answer, unless you are an unbelievably cruel bastard, or at least horribly uneducated about the realities of zygote death in the US, is yes of course we should.