And if someone still couldn't afford insurance and didn't qualify for the free government shit, they are very few and far in between.
You think they're really that rare? I see one every morning I get up. I'm a non-smoking, non-drinking, non-fat college graduate who drives a '92 Saturn and lives in a studio apartment. I also have $3,000/month in medical expenses and can't get private insurance because it's a preexisting condition and can't get government insurance because I do have a job; the kind of job I imagine allows people like you to sit comfortably and muse on how impossible it is that someone could have problems beyond their control or means. So what suggestions for lifestyle change do you, oh wise and all-knowing one, have to offer me? And please don't say to hurry up and die to better decrease the surplus population, I've already read that one.
And the "free government shit," as you so colloquially put it, is near impossible to qualify for thanks to the bureaucratic road blocks put in to buy votes from narcissists like yourself, when all these blocks do is increase the bureaucracy, increase the cost of the programs, while stupendously increasing the pain and suffering felt by people who have no better option than to deal with "government shit." It's a lose/lose/lose!
One last thing. Any person who is capable of navigating through the system and successfully acquiring "free government shit" deserves to be given a high paying job on the spot, because that takes the kind of managerial/HR/PR/accounting talent that cannot be taught.
But if you're ok with this then realize you better be ok if Hillary or Obama gets in and the Republicans continually harass him, and then better be ok when the next president gets harassed by the opposite side again and again.
Ignoring the tu quoque and slippery slope fallacies of your logic, should a President Obama, or a President H. Clinton, or any United States President till the end of time exhibit the same level of incompetence, cronyism, and disregard for the law and the facts as the Bush Presidency has, I would expect and support nothing less than for Congress to put a stop to it.
The current war in Iraq, initiated by a Republican president and backed by a Republican Congress, is consistent with this pattern.
The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq was passed by a Democratic Senate in Oct. 2002. Maybe a more accurate version of the theory would be "When the opposition party is weak" rather than as when there is unified government.
Speaking from my own experience, surrounded by the elderly, laypeople don't believe it's really as easy to hack voting machines as everyone says. The first place they hear about it isn't from Princeton, it's from CNN or FOX, and they dismiss it as sensationalism as usual. They're too enamored with how easy it is to use the machine to "hassle" themselves with absentee ballots and they think it's neat to push buttons on the screen. Novelty is outweighing the desire for free and fair elections.
After the election, even if, contrary to all expectations, the Republicans win races they really shouldn't, I believe that in today's political climate no one would be receptive to the claim that the machines were hacked simply because Democrats are seen as chronic whiners and sore losers, and because the public just doesn't respond to the media anymore unless its reinforcing what they already believe.
And in the name of unnecessary political correctness, I'll explain that the reason why I'm talking as if the Republicans are the only ones cheating is because everything points to that Party being the one that needs to cheat to still win at this point.
Slashdot Mirror
Since when is demonstrating Godwin's Law considered insightful?
And the "free government shit," as you so colloquially put it, is near impossible to qualify for thanks to the bureaucratic road blocks put in to buy votes from narcissists like yourself, when all these blocks do is increase the bureaucracy, increase the cost of the programs, while stupendously increasing the pain and suffering felt by people who have no better option than to deal with "government shit." It's a lose/lose/lose!
One last thing. Any person who is capable of navigating through the system and successfully acquiring "free government shit" deserves to be given a high paying job on the spot, because that takes the kind of managerial/HR/PR/accounting talent that cannot be taught.
Typical science fiction is not very good.
That would be more accurately called a snowclone.
We don't give that much of damn, since we're also the ones who repeatedly extinguish other species.
In other words, "I can't defend this, but want to, so I'm going to attack the environmentalist bogeymen instead."
Speaking from my own experience, surrounded by the elderly, laypeople don't believe it's really as easy to hack voting machines as everyone says. The first place they hear about it isn't from Princeton, it's from CNN or FOX, and they dismiss it as sensationalism as usual. They're too enamored with how easy it is to use the machine to "hassle" themselves with absentee ballots and they think it's neat to push buttons on the screen. Novelty is outweighing the desire for free and fair elections.
After the election, even if, contrary to all expectations, the Republicans win races they really shouldn't, I believe that in today's political climate no one would be receptive to the claim that the machines were hacked simply because Democrats are seen as chronic whiners and sore losers, and because the public just doesn't respond to the media anymore unless its reinforcing what they already believe.
And in the name of unnecessary political correctness, I'll explain that the reason why I'm talking as if the Republicans are the only ones cheating is because everything points to that Party being the one that needs to cheat to still win at this point.