Entitled GOP Pundit is in fact, Entitled!!!

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,126
126
From the you simply can't make this shit up files...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life...g-chelsea-handler-debate-politicon/524542001/

Conservative pundit Tomi Lahren admits that while making statements like...

She believes in her right to purchase healthcare, she doesn't "believe it's my right to pay for it for other people."

admits that SHE is in fact not paying for anyone's health care right now, including her own...

While on the Chelsea Handler show, she admitted that she is still covered under her parents health care and is only covered because of Obamacare.

"Do you have a healthcare plan or no?" Handler asked Lahren during the exchange, according to Fortune.

"Well luckily, I'm 24, so I am still on my parents'," Lahren said.

Unreal, simply unreal... Kind of cute.... kind of stupid...

Perfection!

WINNING!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Uhtrinity

Platinum Member
Dec 21, 2003
2,248
196
106
Two things stand out to me:

1. The hypocrisy of her being on parents account while railing against ACA
2. Considering how successful she is / was, she is still on her parents account
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,326
6,038
126
So a girl with perhaps no real gifts in the world but her cunning and good looks, decides to cash in on the cash cow of conservative conformational bias need that an altered reality bubble needs to keep from exploding, is somehow guilty of the immorality of lying in a system that has created both the financial necessity of competing in life for money, and destroying all natural morality people are born with, should some how make me stand up and scream hypocrite as she also takes every advantage offered her by Obamacare. I say good on you girl. You at least managed not to suck dick for a living that has actual germs on it.
 
Feb 4, 2009
34,494
15,729
136
Here is what I have to say

6a00d8341c562c53ef017742efed55970d-pi
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,015
2,845
136
Is she doing something illegal or morally fraudulent?

For example, many people don't believe in the way that the tax code is structured and perhaps don't think it is right to deduct mortgage interest, student loan interest, or reward themselves in the tax game by having children. No one is forcing them to make these deductions, but are hypocrites for choosing to do so when given the opportunity?

I don't think so. Not if they aren't doing so fraudulently.

FYI, I don't agree with her position, but I don't think it is discounted by the fact that she saves money by being on her parent's policy.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
So a girl with perhaps no real gifts in the world but her cunning and good looks, decides to cash in on the cash cow of conservative conformational bias need that an altered reality bubble needs to keep from exploding, is somehow guilty of the immorality of lying in a system that has created both the financial necessity of competing in life for money, and destroying all natural morality people are born with, should some how make me stand up and scream hypocrite as she also takes every advantage offered her by Obamacare. I say good on you girl. You at least managed not to suck dick for a living that has actual germs on it.

The effects of the system on natural morality vary by the individual. As you've noted yourself there are differences in nature & nurture that make it so.

Right wing punditry is what happens when charismatic psychopaths look out at what they perceive to be an ocean of chumps...
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,716
47,396
136
Is she doing something illegal or morally fraudulent?

For example, many people don't believe in the way that the tax code is structured and perhaps don't think it is right to deduct mortgage interest, student loan interest, or reward themselves in the tax game by having children. No one is forcing them to make these deductions, but are hypocrites for choosing to do so when given the opportunity?

I don't think so. Not if they aren't doing so fraudulently.

FYI, I don't agree with her position, but I don't think it is discounted by the fact that she saves money by being on her parent's policy.

While overall I agree with you on the principle that there's nothing wrong or hypocritical with complying with laws while advocating against them it seems a bit rich to complain about having to pay for other people's health care while having someone pay for hers.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,309
1,209
126
Is she doing something illegal or morally fraudulent?

For example, many people don't believe in the way that the tax code is structured and perhaps don't think it is right to deduct mortgage interest, student loan interest, or reward themselves in the tax game by having children. No one is forcing them to make these deductions, but are hypocrites for choosing to do so when given the opportunity?

I don't think so. Not if they aren't doing so fraudulently.

FYI, I don't agree with her position, but I don't think it is discounted by the fact that she saves money by being on her parent's policy.

... which she can only be on because of the system she is protesting against..... She must be a born-again Christian...
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Is she doing something illegal or morally fraudulent?

For example, many people don't believe in the way that the tax code is structured and perhaps don't think it is right to deduct mortgage interest, student loan interest, or reward themselves in the tax game by having children. No one is forcing them to make these deductions, but are hypocrites for choosing to do so when given the opportunity?

I don't think so. Not if they aren't doing so fraudulently.

FYI, I don't agree with her position, but I don't think it is discounted by the fact that she saves money by being on her parent's policy.

Yeh, Free! Freedom! Liberty! Independence! & Personal responsibility! go right out the window when it comes to saving a few bucks....
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,015
2,845
136
While overall I agree with you on the principle that there's nothing wrong or hypocritical with complying with laws while advocating against them it seems a bit rich to complain about having to pay for other people's health care while having someone pay for hers.

I think it puts into doubt the credibility of her stance and her capacity to appreciate the reality others face or would be facing if ACA were repealed. But I'm guessing her public conservative activism is driven by more than deeply rooted belief in the sovereignty of the positions she advocates.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,085
5,618
126
Is she doing something illegal or morally fraudulent?

For example, many people don't believe in the way that the tax code is structured and perhaps don't think it is right to deduct mortgage interest, student loan interest, or reward themselves in the tax game by having children. No one is forcing them to make these deductions, but are hypocrites for choosing to do so when given the opportunity?

I don't think so. Not if they aren't doing so fraudulently.

FYI, I don't agree with her position, but I don't think it is discounted by the fact that she saves money by being on her parent's policy.

....cause we all suggested she should be arrested.....
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,326
6,038
126
While overall I agree with you on the principle that there's nothing wrong or hypocritical with complying with laws while advocating against them it seems a bit rich to complain about having to pay for other people's health care while having someone pay for hers.
I agree with this. The immorality is not in using Obamacare. It is in preaching against what you are doing while not being up front that you are doing so. She is a prostitute, who preaches against what she benefits from hoping others will not get that chance and that Obamacare will be taken away, and she does this for the for the financial benefits to be gained by notoriety, the salary of right winged punditry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,326
6,038
126
I think it puts into doubt the credibility of her stance and her capacity to appreciate the reality others face or would be facing if ACA were repealed. But I'm guessing her public conservative activism is driven by more than deeply rooted belief in the sovereignty of the positions she advocates.
It is that very sovereignty that is put to the test and failed with her acceptance of Obamacare. She does not walk the talk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
17,574
9,262
136
For example, many people don't believe in the way that the tax code is structured and perhaps don't think it is right to deduct mortgage interest, student loan interest, or reward themselves in the tax game by having children. No one is forcing them to make these deductions, but are hypocrites for choosing to do so when given the opportunity?

Her situation is pretty much textbook hypocrisy: She's complaining about a particular subsidised healthcare scheme while labelling subsidised healthcare as bad because one should only pay for one's own healthcare, then it's revealed that she gets someone else to pay for her healthcare, which happens to be the exact scheme that she's complaining about in the first place.

It wouldn't be quite as hypocritical if the scheme her parents were paying for her was something other than obamacare, but it would still be pretty fucking rich for her to complain.

To criticise your example, yes it is hypocrisy to personally profit from a tax avoidance scheme while simultaneously publicly criticising the system, because the whole point of closing tax loopholes is to ensure that everyone pays their fair share of tax so that public services are properly funded. I've literally never heard any other argument for closing tax loopholes. Furthermore, it's even more hypocritical when one considers that the most likely reason for someone to publicly criticise such a system is to boost their own popularity, most likely for political purposes. If the person in question isn't seeking to be a 'public figure', then perhaps they should decide whether a) they should try to do something about the problem or b) be a part of the problem and not be such a fucking hypocrite by gaining from it while bitching about it. Either they give a shit about the problem or they don't.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,716
47,396
136
Her situation is pretty much textbook hypocrisy: She's complaining about a particular subsidised healthcare scheme while labelling subsidised healthcare as bad because one should only pay for one's own healthcare, then it's revealed that she gets someone else to pay for her healthcare, which happens to be the exact scheme that she's complaining about in the first place.

It wouldn't be quite as hypocritical if the scheme her parents were paying for her was something other than obamacare, but it would still be pretty fucking rich for her to complain.

To criticise your example, yes it is hypocrisy to personally profit from a tax avoidance scheme while simultaneously publicly criticising the system, because the whole point of closing tax loopholes is to ensure that everyone pays their fair share of tax so that public services are properly funded. I've literally never heard any other argument for closing tax loopholes. Furthermore, it's even more hypocritical when one considers that the most likely reason for someone to publicly criticise such a system is to boost their own popularity, most likely for political purposes. If the person in question isn't seeking to be a 'public figure', then perhaps they should decide whether a) they should try to do something about the problem or b) be a part of the problem and not be such a fucking hypocrite by gaining from it while bitching about it. Either they give a shit about the problem or they don't.

I disagree here. You can argue that tax loopholes should be closed while taking advantage of them yourself and not be a hypocrite at all. People are not and should not be bound to follow laws that don't exist just because they think they should exist in the future.
 

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91
Not following you Moonie. The whole reason this discussion is happening is because she was up front in admitting she is on her parent's insurance.
I agree with this. The immorality is not in using Obamacare. It is in preaching against what you are doing while not being up front that you are doing so.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
17,574
9,262
136
I disagree here. You can argue that tax loopholes should be closed while taking advantage of them yourself and not be a hypocrite at all. People are not and should not be bound to follow laws that don't exist just because they think they should exist in the future.

Yuh-huh. If you think something is wrong, you shouldn't do it.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,716
47,396
136
Yuh-huh. If you think something is wrong, you shouldn't do it.

Surely you can see the difference between something you consider morally wrong, which you shouldn't do regardless of the legal consequences, and public policy you happen to disagree with. For example I think the mortgage interest deduction should be eliminated but I'll be damned if I won't claim it every year until it is.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,326
6,038
126
Not following you Moonie. The whole reason this discussion is happening is because she was up front in admitting she is on her parent's insurance.
Thank you Corn, I was under the perhaps false impression due maybe to a lack of careful reading, that the fact was dragged out of her and not offered up front. I do agree with interchange, that conservative principles are can be rooted in real moral feelings even if those feelings are hated by liberals because for liberals they take president over far more important moral concerns that liberals have as part of their moral set. I will, when I get a chance reexamine the data. Got some other stuff going on simultaneous to responding to this thread.
 

J.Wilkins

Platinum Member
Jun 5, 2017
2,681
640
91
Surely you can see the difference between something you consider morally wrong, which you shouldn't do regardless of the legal consequences, and public policy you happen to disagree with. For example I think the mortgage interest deduction should be eliminated but I'll be damned if I won't claim it every year until it is.

"be the change you wish to see in others" and other cliché's do not have much to offer when it comes to greed I guess. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,716
47,396
136
"be the change you wish to see in others" and other cliché's do not have much to offer when it comes to greed I guess. ;)

You might do it as an effective form of advocacy but other than that it's pretty useless. Taxes and other macro level policies are only meaningful in that they can compel action from large groups of people. I think the mortgage interest deduction is bad policy because it distorts the rental/housing market, is extremely regressive, and is extremely expensive, but whether or not I pay that has functionally zero effect on any of those things.

It's the same thing as if you supported military action against a country that doesn't mean you have to go in there and carry out a Rambo II style guerrilla campaign until the US get's its shit together and declares war. In both cases it's people endorsing cheap symbolism over reality.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
35,956
27,638
136
Now that the GOP rank and file signed up for the ACA they are coming around. Politicians still holding onto their hypocritical positions. That's why repeal went down in a flaming ball.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie