Unbiased Sideline Judge wrote:
No, the internet tough guy was the Boulder guy, threatening the duck guy. Can you actually read weakling or does someone interpret for you?
TroLLminator wrote:Look at this internet tough guy, demanding someone's name and contact info... like you are going to do something with that. Trying way too hard, you are undoubtedly a bird chested wimp. You should be careful what you wish for, I have a feeling this Amal guy could easily bash your pimply face in.
Hi Froggie!
TroLLminator wrote:
The walls are starting to squeeze them in and they are getting paranoid... "Trump says we are winning so why is nothing getting done?"
Fat hurts wrote:This is getting funny. All of you Trumpers think I use multiple handles. I don't and I never have.
I don't think there is any "they". Look back at the last 10 Trumpette posts. 10 different handles. All exactly the same nonsense. All precisely the same writing style.
You folks are all responding to 1 guy.
[quote]Weezy Board wrote:
Democrats are whiners who need the approval of others. Fat hurts, Conundrum, Uno, Trollgay, etc...It's about getting people to agree with their messed up theories about how our government should be run. They'll never be happy with an Republican, but praise Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama. They have Leftist tunnel vision. Very few on this thread have agreed with anything the other side says. Unfortunately they are not smart enough to realize that they won't change a thing, but waste precious hours of this thing we call life. I honestly have pity for them, but not too much. I came on in the 380+ page point and started reading. Nothing has changed.
Seacrest OUT!!!!!! Enjoy posting and this thread, you guys are beyond help.[quote]
You left out Eric a blair, he shouldn't be included as an etc.........
Thank you your concern reflected in your saying, "I have pity for them"
With Donald as our president all Americans are worthy of your pity.
I also appreciate your taking time to post about our wasting time posting and not being smart enough to realize no one will change their mind. Your post didn't change my mind about it though but thanks for taking the time to try.
I can't speak for others, I post because I enjoy posting. Not trying to offend, but this post was fun.
Great piece from the conservative media blasting Trump. Combine this one with an anti-Trump editorial from the WSJ today, and we are seeing some pushback from the right wing.
Fox is still on the trump train. But others are loudly getting off and cursing the engineer.
I see the failure of the healthcare bill to pass as a victory for the US.
They were going to take coverage from millions and now the law stands at is.
The repeal now and replace later doesn't look like it has traction.
The Democrats got 60 senators out of 60 to agree on a bill that was a step forward in 2009. Ratified in 2010.
After years of campaigning against it and gaining a majority, Republicans can't get 50 of 52 to agree on a better plan. (They may have been nowhere near 50)
They can't write a better plan, not with their ideology. Because their ideology is not about helping as many people as possible.
Now voters have to vote Democrats in control to improve on the ACA.
The first step is it to take the House next year.
The Republicans essentially have 12 more months to take more shots at this.
But the low income worker in Nebraska that gained healthcare because of Obamacare subsidies and Medicaid expansion can sleep a little easier with this failure.
I get your point and it's probably just a matter of semantics, but I don't see this as winning. I just see it as "not losing".Obamacare really does need a major overhaul. It was never a good bill. It was always just the best that could be done at the moment.We certainly could pass legislation that would bring down costs and truly get us to universal coverage. To me, that would be a true win.
L L wrote:
I see the failure of the healthcare bill to pass as a victory for the US.
They were going to take coverage from millions and now the law stands at is.
The repeal now and replace later doesn't look like it has traction.
The Democrats got 60 senators out of 60 to agree on a bill that was a step forward in 2009. Ratified in 2010.
After years of campaigning against it and gaining a majority, Republicans can't get 50 of 52 to agree on a better plan. (They may have been nowhere near 50)
They can't write a better plan, not with their ideology. Because their ideology is not about helping as many people as possible.
Now voters have to vote Democrats in control to improve on the ACA.
The first step is it to take the House next year.
The Republicans essentially have 12 more months to take more shots at this.
But the low income worker in Nebraska that gained healthcare because of Obamacare subsidies and Medicaid expansion can sleep a little easier with this failure.
agree with fats - ACA was a mishmash of ideas meant to try to get repubs and dems on the same side. As a result it is a bit of a sausage. And it's been a couple years - it could use an overhaul to get the exchanges healthier. But the overall idea is solid. Force everyone to have health insurance. Use the private market to try to hold down costs. Regulate the plans to make them acceptable. Subsidize the policies for those who can't afford them. I have no core problem with the basic layout, but obvi it needs tweaks to get it running. In particular, middle class types seem to be caught out - they seem to need bigger subsidies.
Fat hurts wrote:
I get your point and it's probably just a matter of semantics, but I don't see this as winning. I just see it as "not losing".
Obamacare really does need a major overhaul. It was never a good bill. It was always just the best that could be done at the moment.
We certainly could pass legislation that would bring down costs and truly get us to universal coverage. To me, that would be a true win.
L L wrote:I see the failure of the healthcare bill to pass as a victory for the US.
They were going to take coverage from millions and now the law stands at is.
The repeal now and replace later doesn't look like it has traction.
The Democrats got 60 senators out of 60 to agree on a bill that was a step forward in 2009. Ratified in 2010.
After years of campaigning against it and gaining a majority, Republicans can't get 50 of 52 to agree on a better plan. (They may have been nowhere near 50)
They can't write a better plan, not with their ideology. Because their ideology is not about helping as many people as possible.
Now voters have to vote Democrats in control to improve on the ACA.
The first step is it to take the House next year.
The Republicans essentially have 12 more months to take more shots at this.
But the low income worker in Nebraska that gained healthcare because of Obamacare subsidies and Medicaid expansion can sleep a little easier with this failure.
Fat hurts wrote:
...
We certainly could pass legislation that would bring down costs and truly get us to universal coverage. To me, that would be a true win.
...
No you can't, and universal coverage won't save money and won't be universal.
Why didn't the Democrats pass their Utopian solution to health care when Republicans had no power to stop it? If such a plan existed the Democrats would have rammed it through when they had the chance? Instead all they did was create some new entitlements which they knew would make it impossible to undo.
In the end that's all government does, buy one person's vote with someone else's money.
I am on record predicting that Trump and the Republicans would not repeal ObamaCare, or at least they wouldn't repeal the parts that make it unsustainable, like pre-existing conditions and "kids" on their parents plan until they are 26. Once government starts handing out goodies, no politician will fight to stop it.
This won't end well.
DiscoGary wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:...
We certainly could pass legislation that would bring down costs and truly get us to universal coverage. To me, that would be a true win.
...
No you can't, and universal coverage won't save money and won't be universal.
Why didn't the Democrats pass their Utopian solution to health care when Republicans had no power to stop it? If such a plan existed the Democrats would have rammed it through when they had the chance? Instead all they did was create some new entitlements which they knew would make it impossible to undo.
In the end that's all government does, buy one person's vote with someone else's money.
I am on record predicting that Trump and the Republicans would not repeal ObamaCare, or at least they wouldn't repeal the parts that make it unsustainable, like pre-existing conditions and "kids" on their parents plan until they are 26. Once government starts handing out goodies, no politician will fight to stop it.
This won't end well.
first off, every rich nation on earth has universal health care. Except the US.
So universal health care is not utopian. Universal health care is normal.
second off,
The real story of the ACA is that the Dems tried to come up with a combo of right wing and centrist ideas. The basic dea came from a right wing think tank. Mitt Romney did soemthing similar to the ACA in his state. So it was meant to be a compromise that repubs could work with.
But
The right wingers in this country don't compromise.
eric a blair wrote:
...
In particular, middle class types seem to be caught out - they seem to need bigger subsidies.
...
About 25 years ago I predicted that government meddling in the health care markets would drive up costs until the middle class could no longer afford it. At that point the system would collapse and government would step in and say "Enough is enough! Let's put an end to all this profiting off the sick and let us compassionate people running government take over and do it right!" I also predicted there was no political force powerful enough to stop it. Well, it could have been stopped if our schools had taught the dangers of socialism, but they weren't teaching it back then and still aren't now. And I could see that wouldn't be changing either.
So we have finally reached the tipping point where government will finish taking over the whole thing. It will be a nightmare.
My favorite Tea Party sign was:
"If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it's FREE!"
eric a blair wrote:
...
The real story of the ACA is that the Dems tried to come up with a combo of right wing and centrist ideas. The basic dea came from a right wing think tank. Mitt Romney did soemthing similar to the ACA in his state. So it was meant to be a compromise that repubs could work with.
But
The right wingers in this country don't compromise.
No. The real story of ObamaCare is that it was written without any input from Republicans and very little input from Democrats! Democrat votes were bought off in one of the most disgusting displays of political corruption ever witnessed in this country. Most (all?) Democrats voted for it without knowing what was in it.
The Democrats had their chance to put anything in place, and ObamaCare, simply more entitlements, more handouts, is all we got.
Blaming Republicans for the mess of ObamaCare proves that another one of my predictions is true... that Republicans will be blamed for all the policy failures of the Democrats.
Your guys had their chance and failed because it is not possible to do what they were trying to do.
DiscoGary wrote:
eric a blair wrote:...
In particular, middle class types seem to be caught out - they seem to need bigger subsidies.
...
About 25 years ago I predicted that government meddling in the health care markets would drive up costs until the middle class could no longer afford it. At that point the system would collapse and government would step in and say "Enough is enough! Let's put an end to all this profiting off the sick and let us compassionate people running government take over and do it right!" I also predicted there was no political force powerful enough to stop it. Well, it could have been stopped if our schools had taught the dangers of socialism, but they weren't teaching it back then and still aren't now. And I could see that wouldn't be changing either.
So we have finally reached the tipping point where government will finish taking over the whole thing. It will be a nightmare.
My favorite Tea Party sign was:
"If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it's FREE!"
funny...the Brits and the Canadians and the Aussies like their universal, mostly government funded healthcare. Quite popular there. I wonder why you think that Americans are so much worse at things than the Brits, Canadians and Aussies.
hmmm.....
eric a blair wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:About 25 years ago I predicted that government meddling in the health care markets would drive up costs until the middle class could no longer afford it. At that point the system would collapse and government would step in and say "Enough is enough! Let's put an end to all this profiting off the sick and let us compassionate people running government take over and do it right!" I also predicted there was no political force powerful enough to stop it. Well, it could have been stopped if our schools had taught the dangers of socialism, but they weren't teaching it back then and still aren't now. And I could see that wouldn't be changing either.
So we have finally reached the tipping point where government will finish taking over the whole thing. It will be a nightmare.
My favorite Tea Party sign was:
"If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it's FREE!"
funny...the Brits and the Canadians and the Aussies like their universal, mostly government funded healthcare. Quite popular there. I wonder why you think that Americans are so much worse at things than the Brits, Canadians and Aussies.
hmmm.....
I have explained this many times. You do not posses the intellect to understand it.
DiscoGary wrote:
eric a blair wrote:funny...the Brits and the Canadians and the Aussies like their universal, mostly government funded healthcare. Quite popular there. I wonder why you think that Americans are so much worse at things than the Brits, Canadians and Aussies.
hmmm.....
I have explained this many times. You do not posses the intellect to understand it.
Hey, good to have you back, kid. Sure beats the one dude with 20 handles which has been the only Trumpette representation of late.
You wanted our schools to teach the dangers of socialism.
Schools
Schools, which are the best example of how socialism could work to the benefit of all.
Schools, which are funded by tax payers and are available to each an every American regardless of income level.
Schools are supposed to teach that we shouldn't pool our money together to provide healthcare for all at the same time we are pooling our money together to provide school for all.
You want the taxpayers to chip in to teach every American child that we shouldn't chip in to help every American.
Recogiphant wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:I have explained this many times. You do not posses the intellect to understand it.
Hey, good to have you back, kid. Sure beats the one dude with 20 handles which has been the only Trumpette representation of late.
Yeah, well the Dems here have gone completely nuts over this Russian thing, so there wasn't much to talk about. Imagine what it would have been like if EVERY SINGLE Republican in the country had turned into a rabid birther after Obama got elected, and that's all everyone talked about every day 24/7. That's what has happened with the Democrats.
L L wrote:
You wanted our schools to teach the dangers of socialism.
Schools
Schools, which are the best example of how socialism could work to the benefit of all.
Schools, which are funded by tax payers and are available to each an every American regardless of income level.
Schools are supposed to teach that we shouldn't pool our money together to provide healthcare for all at the same time we are pooling our money together to provide school for all.
You want the taxpayers to chip in to teach every American child that we shouldn't chip in to help every American.
Schools, whose unions are driving Illinois to bankruptcy through their unsustainable socialist retirement plan.
Yes. Schools should teach the dangers of socialism.
DiscoGary wrote:
Recogiphant wrote:Hey, good to have you back, kid. Sure beats the one dude with 20 handles which has been the only Trumpette representation of late.
Yeah, well the Dems here have gone completely nuts over this Russian thing, so there wasn't much to talk about. Imagine what it would have been like if EVERY SINGLE Republican in the country had turned into a rabid birther after Obama got elected, and that's all everyone talked about every day 24/7. That's what has happened with the Democrats.
Gary:
Two questions:
1) Was it illegal for Jr, Kush and Manafort to meet with a rep from the Russian gov't in the hopes of getting dirt on HRC?
2) was it ethical or unethical for junior, Kush and Manafort to meet with a rep from the Russian government in the hopes of getting dirt on HRC?
ok, and a third because you may be one of the delusional Repubs who don't believe anything:
3) Did Junior, Kush and Manafort in fact meet with lawyer billed as representing the Russian Government,, with the hopes of getting dirt on HRC?
I'm just trying to get a sense of where on the spectrum you live.
from a new poll from PPP
Trump does a lot of losing in our poll. Voters wish that either Barack Obama (53/40) or Hillary Clinton (49/42) was President instead of Trump. Trump loses by wide margins in hypothetical matches against Joe Biden (54/39) or Bernie Sanders (52/39) for reelection. Trump loses 12-13% of the folks who voted for him last fall to either Biden or Sanders. Trump also trails in hypothetical contests against Elizabeth Warren (49/42), Cory Booker (45/40), and Kamala Harris (41/40).
eric a blair wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:Yeah, well the Dems here have gone completely nuts over this Russian thing, so there wasn't much to talk about. Imagine what it would have been like if EVERY SINGLE Republican in the country had turned into a rabid birther after Obama got elected, and that's all everyone talked about every day 24/7. That's what has happened with the Democrats.
Gary:
Two questions:
1) Was it illegal for Jr, Kush and Manafort to meet with a rep from the Russian gov't in the hopes of getting dirt on HRC?
2) was it ethical or unethical for junior, Kush and Manafort to meet with a rep from the Russian government in the hopes of getting dirt on HRC?
ok, and a third because you may be one of the delusional Repubs who don't believe anything:
3) Did Junior, Kush and Manafort in fact meet with lawyer billed as representing the Russian Government,, with the hopes of getting dirt on HRC?
I'm just trying to get a sense of where on the spectrum you live.
If a crime was committed, then prosecute. Gathering dirt from anywhere is not a crime and Dershowitz himself said so.
This is why there's no intelligent discussion with liberals right now. You guys have gone full birther crazy. Barack Obama himself said he was born in Kenya. Do you believe him? Let's find out where you are on the spectrum!
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
Matt Choi was drinking beer halfway through the Boston Marathon