1 - 10 Next
Everybody scoffs at veganism until they have a coronary.
"Only four percent of Americans are newly insured this year" "So when is Obama's vision of his law providing healthcare for millions of uninsured Americans supposed to come to fruition?" 4% of the roughly 260,000,000 Americans over 18 is about 10 million people. So, to answer your question, read your own headline. Or the first line of your article. If you don't believe the numbers, then why use them to make a point? I seriously think this author didn't realize that 4% of Americans is still millions of people. Even if only half of that 4% used the exchanges that's still more than five million people.
What John Hawkins is doing with this article is exactly right. If you disagree with a company leaders opinions and decisions strongly enough, boycott them. Then, use any public forum available, from pulpits to social media to tell people why. Then, hope for results due to a groundswell of public outcry. But John, don't get upset when people who disagree with you take the same approach. Because you are complaining about what happened at Mozilla, but what happened to their CEO was a result of boycott, public outcry and a groundswell of support that influenced the board to take action. So you agree with the tactics that got this CEO fired, but not the reason, so you are for some reason outraged. Because you are a whining, self victimizing hypocrite.
Thanks for your interest in my city's safety, but an ounce of research would have told you that the first concealed carry permits were not even issued until March. Aldo, the murder rate has been on the decline for the past almost two years, the first quarter of 2014 is just a continuation of that trend. I am not opposed to concealed carry or gun ownership, I plan to take advantage of our newly relaxed laws myself. But crappy journalism and omission of facts to prove a point should have no place in this debate.
Republicans decry the "food police" when they want to regulate and put warning labels on pop, but want to be the food police when it comes to what people spend SNAP on. They don't want the poor using it to buy unhealthy food, but don't want them buying healthy organic salmon. Just because it comes from tax payer money doesn't mean we get to have a say of what it is spent on. Our tax dollars pay politician's salaries, defense contractors shareholders and oil company subsidies, but we don't have any say on how they spend these benefits. Don't let a small percentage of fraud in food assistance programs influence your compassion for feeding the poor.
In response to:

The Tea Party Turns Five

South Side Of Chicago Wrote: Feb 27, 2014 6:06 PM
It's surprising that the Tea Party is just now turning 5, considering that they've been acting like 5 year olds this whole time.
"Now, the only time Boehner didn’t keep his promise was in 2006" Yes, when he didn't commit suicide after voting to raise the minimum wage.
A reduction in the consumption of pop (as we call it here) would save billions in public and private spending on health. It is dangerous and it's use should be discouraged. Labeling does not limit anyone's freedomIf the only opposing info this writer can muster up is provided by the agency whose job it is to sell as much pop as possible, their rationale and figures are dubious. We put warning labels on dangerous products do not limit anyone's freedom of choice, it helps make their choice more informed. Should we stop rating movies, publishing pharmaceutical side effects and printing safety info on car seats? Get over it, if you see putting a warning on pop as an affront on your freedom, you have no clue as to what oppression really is.
As a progressive liberal, I would like to see more policies that would be considered Socialist enacted. I have two choices: join some fringe Socialist party that has no chance for electoral success or try to influence the two party political process by supporting Democrats. The first choice makes me feel proud and principled, but achieves nothing. The second might move the system towards something I favor while compromising some core beliefs along the way. Cruz and company are principled losers, sacrificing the ability to get some of their aims accomplished in the name of getting none of them accomplished. Thank Cruz for all of the recent Democratic victories on the budget, debt ceiling and Obamacare funding, he proved stonewalling does nothing and convinced moderate Republicans that negotiating at least gets you a voice and some concessions. I should donate to Cruz's reelection fund, he helps make your party look rediculous and incompetent daily.
You are endorsing a kind of "make life difficult, they will self deport" approach that sunk Romney. Your opinion is your opinion, but it isn't a winning strategy for national political success.
1 - 10 Next