Could we keep things in perspective? Please???

Enough already. Enough!

If I hear one more "So and so are like the Nazis" I'm gonna ....... engage in my own hyperbole.

Seriously, do you know how stupid, and uniformed you sound when you say healthcare, or gun control laws are like the Nazis? You sound ignorant. To be fair I will tell you what are acceptable things to say are "like the Nazis.:

1) The Nazis

That's the list. All of it. The whole enchilada. The kit and kaboodle. Unless your store windows are being broken, and your business shuttered because of your faith, or descendants you can't compare current affairs to the Nazis. Unless you have to produce identification papers to ride the goddamned bus, what's happening isn't remotely close to what happened under the Nazis in the 1930s and 40s. Unless there's a suspicious new camp erected near your town by the railroad, and you don't recall there being much activity related to hiring people to work there - what's happening isn't anywhere near what happened in eastern Germany, and Poland in the 1940s. Nobody. Let me repeat, nobody, no group, no party is like the Nazis. Not even remotely so.

So stop. Stop it. Stop being historically illiterate, and ignorant.

While we're at it let's address another bit of historical hyperbole that has become in vogue lately when it comes to debate, ahem "debate." Comparisons to Stalin and Mao. Again, to be fair, there are acceptable comparisons to Stalin and Mao,

1) Stalin
2) Mao

I know, it's a list that's twice as long. Still, it's short enough to quickly commit to memory. When the political parties in your country take political opponents, put them on trains to work camps you can say they're just like Stalin or Mao. When their writings are made illegal, burned, and printers penalized for producing them, you can compare them to Stalin and Mao. Till then you need to find a more apt comparison. Political bullies are not in short supply, and they come in varieties across the political spectrum.

Please, apply some sense of perspective.

Whose culture of dependency?

Why is it they need to cut food stamps citing "ending the culture of dependency" for poor people, but they never talk about cutting subsidies for big agriculture, or defense contractors, or telecoms, or any of the other big businesses who, for years, use subsidies, and other tax loopholes. Isn't THAT a "culture of dependency" too? There's one important difference. People that use food stamps are, well first off 2/3rd are kids, but the rest are not campaign donors. So the tough talk the tea party simpletons put out there about budgets, and "dependency" is just a collection of platitudes that gets their benefactors to open the checkbook.

It's the same thing in a different vein when it comes to the circle jerk in the House with the 42nd vote to repeal the ACA, or to de-fund it in the looming debt limit. Why are House Republicans passing a bill that will not pass a Senate controlled by the Democrats, or surely get the VETO if it gets to the White House? Principle? A principled politician - that's really sweet of you. It's to show the check writers they're deserving of a little something something for the PAC. Those check writers don't want the ACA.

Here's my question: if the ACA is so bad, and will be so much suckitude in application why don't those who oppose it just let it suck, ride the suckage to election wins - since it'll suck so much right - and the repeal it?

Answer: It won't suck, and there goes the "culture of dependency" that those check writers will have to live without.

It's important to remember that when these things because they're never mentioned in the "red team/blue team" bullshit narrative that mainstream media thinks is "balanced" coverage.