The Glade 4.0

I disagree. Emotion is an important and inescapable element of the justification for legislation. Emotion helps determine what our goals are; rationality helps determine the best way to achieve them. True, sometimes emotion can be destructive, and destructive emotions may lead to destructive legislation, but that's not an argument against all emotion - we needn't throw the baby out with the bath water. And truthfully, I'm not sure you actually disagree. After all, the desire for personal liberty is an emotion, and the system of governance that espoused both the possibility and the benefits of an emotionless approach to goverment is the one you most oppose - Communism.

Did his proposed solution tend to the problems his mother was having?
I ask again.

You don't read many liberal commentators do you?

No, it would not have helped his mother, but, as I keep pointing out, her experience was essentially no different than the experiences of the people that his proposed solution will help, which is why he cited it as part of the motivation for his proposal. He wanted to help other sick people avoid having to fight with insurance companies over coverage so they wouldn't have to go through the same kind of stress and worry his mother did.

I take your point, NephyrS, but I think the latter interpretation requires a presumption of bad faith, and even then, calling it a lie would be making a mountain out of a molehill, in my opinion. In my view, it's like listening to a veteran advocating for some change in our policy toward Afghanistan and then calling him a liar because he tells a personal anecdote about what it felt like to be in combat without pausing to note that he served in Iraq.

Not repeating a lie(unlike the pesident).

http://www.gallup.com/poll/127382/Ameri ... table.aspx

Most viewed it as a bad thing.

And we have many polls stating most folks would like to see it repealed.

Don't confuse "Most" with "more"

I'm not.

most [məʊst]
determiner
1.
a. a great majority of; nearly all most people like eggs

Yes, yes you are.

49% vs 45% means that "more" people dislike the bill than like the bill.

It does not mean that "most" people dislike the bill, which would generally require at least a simple majority.

I forget how anal this board can be.

Considering this thread: Pure. Comedy. Gold.

I do find it funny how people only seem to get fed up with people on the board being "picky" or "anal" when someone else calls them on something, but it's just business as usual when they're the ones requiring others to be "specific" and "correct".

I do find it funny how people only seem to get fed up with people on the board being "picky" or "anal" when someone else calls them on something, but it's just business as usual when they're the ones requiring others to be "specific" and "correct".

That's just the liberal academia brainwashing.

If human means ignoring logic in order to fall under the emotional appeal I hope I never become human

If human means ignoring logic in order to fall under the emotional appeal I hope I never become human

You are not a god damned vulcan homie.