ikol

Yes.

Congrats, Chris!

Saw it last night and definitely recommend it.

Are you serious? Who gets to decide when a debate is settled? If anyone can do so, I call dibs on abortion and drug legalization.

And if Rutherford Hayes were currently President, my post would've said "Hayes' date nights." Who are you calling Republican?

The same way we pay for bailouts, Social Security, Medicare, Obama's date nights, and scientific research on whether ghosts fart.

I just try to hold it.

I agree... And I agreed with that point, but we don't have to use fear to accomplish that. When you base laws on fear, you get things like the Patriot Act. I don't know about anyone unfamiliar with the concept of hyperbole.

I thought we were assuming that global warming was bunk. There is middle ground between doing nothing and wrecking an already shitty economy by passing laws that try to immediately stop fossil fuel usage.

You're thinking of the plot of The Day After Tomorrow. Absolutely, but there's a difference between "it would be a good idea to find a way to use cheaper, renewable energy sources" and "OMG, WE'RE FUCKED!!! WE MUST REDUCE OIL USAGE TO ZERO IMMEDIATELY TO PREVENT A GLOBAL CATASTROPHE AND EVEN IF WE DO IT'S ALREADY TOO LATE!!!"

This bill will only cost $0.05 apiece? Maybe I should reconsider my position!

That's because MSNBC doesn't like having their programs posted on youtube.

To what bill are you referring? Obama is far too vague of a President to have an actual bill.

Joe Biden is VP, and so far we've survived despite the fact that he just makes shit up without even knowing it and drinks nonalcoholic beer.

President Obama always throws up at the sight of Japanese people.

I just know that they're all douchebags. Discerning the subtle differences in their douchebaggery would require actually listening to them.

So basically, he wants his friends to leave him alone.

I'm pretty sure Muslims aren't too fond of gay marriage, and they take the even more absurd position of opposing bacon. I would hope that you have a higher standard than "not as bad as Pat Robertson." I guess it's easier to claim that an argument has already been debunked than to actually debunk it. I am not trying to suggest that Communism was bad because it was atheist or that all atheists are Stalinists, but if your argument is that Christians have been exceptionally bad for humanity, then there's at least 100 million corpses that disagree with you.

Ever hear of Communism?

I've actually compiled my own list. I assigned points to every nation based on 4 categories. The first one uses a bunch of data such as life expectancy of patients with certain diseases, etc. and accounts for 0.5% of the total score. The second category is a score reflecting what percentage of a nation's healthcare is funded privately and accounts for 50% of the score. Then there's a score based on how many copies of Atlas Shrugged are sold in a nation that makes up 25% of the score. Finally, there's a fudge factor making up 24.5% that scores based on how many medical drama shows are produced

It's also based on highly subjective criteria and circular logic.

Well, at least wealthy enough to afford lunch.

Supposedly, that's the purpose of the rest of the school day.

I have heard this argument before, but I just cannot believe that it has such a small effect on the cost of healthcare. For one thing, it's hard to calculate the indirect costs (defensive medicine, physician shortages due to disgruntled docs retiring early, etc.). Think of how many more C-sections are done now compared to before John Edwards did his thing. If we're going to adopt a system where doctors will inevitably be paid less and have to work longer hours (which will happen with any sort of public option), we're going to have to do something about malpractice premiums. I think a good alte