192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
layman
 
  -4  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 03:18 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
They are not deluded ostriches with their heads in the sand, they are defiant and fierce opponents of the Resistance and all of the forces contained within it.


Kinda strange that the cheese-eaters literally BEG for a beatdown 24/7, and then act surprised when they get it, eh?
0 Replies
 
ossobucotemp
 
  2  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 03:22 pm
@farmerman,
I'm afraid you might be wrong.
0 Replies
 
jcboy
 
  9  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 03:31 pm
Trump's speech to the Boy Scouts was an embarrassment. It clearly shows his incompetence. It was inappropriate and beneath the dignity of the office he holds. It was disgraceful. He's a despicable POS!

The 29 most cringe-worthy lines from Donald Trump's hyper-political speech to the Boy Scouts

Quote:
Washington (CNN)On Monday night, President Donald Trump jetted to West Virginia to address the annual Boy Scout Jamboree. And oh what a speech it was!

ossobucotemp
 
  4  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 03:57 pm
@jcboy,
I was a Girl Scout. We had a class from a mother who showed us how to cook. I almost remember her full name, Mrs. Radcliffe.

Hey, someone showing me how to cook was damned useful. Teacher that mattered. all this long time.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 04:05 pm
Quote:
The US House of Representatives has voted to impose fresh sanctions on Russia, despite President Donald Trump objecting to the legislation.
Senior officials will be targeted in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the US 2016 election.
The bill is likely to complicate President Trump's hopes of improving relations with Russia.
It needs to be passed through the Senate before it can be sent on to the president to be signed.
The White House says Mr Trump has not yet decided whether he will veto the bill or not.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40722299
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  7  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 04:06 pm
@jcboy,
It was deeply disturbing, it would have been nice if he could have just tried to inspire the Eagle Scouts. He couldn't do it, he had to make it into another opportunity for his relentless pity party and daily recitation of grievances. Poor Don, there is not enough slavish blind admiration in the entire world to ever fill that bottomless void.
old europe
 
  7  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 04:11 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

Quote:
Her daughter was on her insurance plan.

So her entire campaign is a scam then? Her daughter had insurance but didn't use it and now we have to have single payer?

Quote:
She just didn't know it, so she got the ER treatment of an uninsured person: instead of completing an MRI, the hospital pressured her into being released.

How did she know she didn't have insurance? Did her mother fail to tell her and provide her with an insurance card and is now blaming the system instead of herself or her daughter? These are not good reasons to campaign on socialism and tax increases for the vast majority of Americans who do not have any issues with their health insurance.


I understand you want this to be a story about personal responsibility, about how this mom was irresponsible and now her daughter is dead because of that. And that you resent the mere idea of single payer health care and taxes and socialism.

However, I've got to ask you: do you actually think there's no problem with ERs discharging someone without providing treatment for a life-threatening, easily treatable condition?

It's my understanding that this is one of the big arguments made in favor of a free market health care system: nobody would ever go without emergency care. Whether they can afford health insurance or not, whether health insurance companies refused to accept them due to pre-existing conditions or not, whether they've been kicked off a plan or their life time payouts have reached their limit or premiums have increased to a point where they no longer can afford to pay them - nobody will be allowed to just die in the streets. ERs will always provide care.

If that doesn't hold true, and if ERs discharge people with acute life threatening conditions due to cost - do you not see that as a problem?
Blickers
 
  5  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 04:40 pm
@Baldimo,
Quote Baldimo:
Quote:
So her entire campaign is a scam then?

No, because you just found out in oralloy's post why she didn't know she still had insurance, and besides the issue is the fact that she thought she didn't have insurance and therefore got the treatment someone who really doesn't have insurance gets, which in this hospital was death. And you're OK with that.

Quote Baldimo:
Quote:
How did she know she didn't have insurance? Did her mother fail to tell her and provide her with an insurance card and is now blaming the system instead of herself or her daughter?

You pull this crap all the time. When Jill Stein said she would pay for a recount in three states which allowed candidates or citizens to do that, you put up post after post demanding to know where the EXTRA money left over from the recount was supposedly going-this was before various courts even said that the recount would proceed or how much it would cost. And you went ahead and posted that phony "issue" several times more during the conversation. As it turned out, none of the three states actually went ahead and had a real vote-by-vote recount, despite getting paid money.

Your strategy in debate seems to be to pick a side issue that you think you might be strong on, and harp on that over and over in an attempt to sidetrack the issue. Fact is, the woman was in the hospital, and because she didn't know she even had insurance she ended up being denied life-saving treatment that she would have gotten if she had insurance. That's the state of medical treatment in America, despite laws which supposedly prevent hospitals from turning away sick patients.
jcboy
 
  7  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 05:47 pm
@glitterbag,
Our president is mentally ill with a narcissistic personality disorder, on top of that I suspect early onset of dementia. I am serious and no insult to persons with mental illness or dementia, but it is important to identify Trumps issues.
Baldimo
 
  -4  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 06:17 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
60% of people get their health insurance through their jobs. 40% from the government (2006 numbers, it may be different now).

That might be true post ACA due to the mandate, but that wouldn't be true before the ACA.

Quote:
If you look at who actually has to USE their health insurance, the government funds 64% of all healthcare spending though. The government is no small player in healthcare.

I don't think this is true, the US govt would have to be supplying insurance for at least that much of the population to be remotely true. Are you including VA spending on healthcare as well?

Quote:
As to benefits, that's the easiest question I'll answer all week.
10 essential health benefits in each plan.


Quote:
Can't deny coverage for pre-existing conditions.
I think most everyone agree's with this, but this was also only really an issue with private insurance and not employer side insurance.
I never had any issues with any of my insurance providers covering my family who had issues before the ACA.

Can't vastly overcharge old people or those with pre-existing conditions.
Overcharge is a loaded statement. I think you mean charge them more, period. I'm against "overcharging" but I see no problems with someone having slightly higher rates if they have more usage. My insurance would be effected as my new wife has epilepsy and would there for cost us more for insurance, which is funny because my costs doubled the first year the ACA was doubled. I paid double but didn't get anything really useful
Can't overcharge women.
There is that term again... If women use more healthcare than a man does, should a man pay the same? These are issues that once again usually only effect private insurance and not the employer supplied insurance.

Children stay on parent's healthcare until age 26.
That is indeed a nice option. With the new wife came new kids which have also been added to my insurance, so I now have "children"
aged- 23, 20,19,17,15. Wouldn't you know it, it doesn't cost any additional money to add the additional kids to my insurance and I don't think that is a provision of the ACA.

Lowered the increases in healthcare costs overall.
So instead of lowering the costs of healthcare, it only lowered the increases... That isn't what was promised or even talked about,
we were told the average American would see a decrease in their health care costs by $2500 a year, this is called the bait and switch. Most Americans have seen no savings on their insurance or their healthcare, only those on the exchanges have seen any cheap insurance and that's due to govt paid subsidies that not every American qualifies for.

Eliminated lifetime and annual coverage limits.
Something we can all agree on, but once again these limits usually only applied to those in the private insurance market, I've had several co-workers over the years who either had cancer or their spouse had it, and there was never any mention of any limits in relation to our insurance.
The insurance exchange market is a vast improvement over the old way purchasing healthcare.
Says who, what proof do you have?
The middle class receives assistance to purchase healthcare.
Do you tell yourself this to feel better? A few million people represent the entire middle class? In a population of 350 million people, 12 million are the middle class? You lefties have really deluded yourselves haven't you?
Increased medicaid to more people.
That isn't a good thing, it shows we are failing people if they have to be on govt insurance. No one looks forward to govt paid for insurance
Required that employers with more than 50 people offer health insurance, instead of making states do it.
More govt regulations on small business, I thought we were suppose to help people... Steal from Peter to pay Paul.
Lowered the budget deficit by 143 billion dollars.
Got some facts on that one?
Eliminated the medicare doughnut hole.
That was a good thing, but again, something that didn't effect a majority of Americans and could have been fixed with it's own legislation
Preventive healthcare has no copay.
BS. I still had to pay my $20 Dr. visit when I went for my physical and the cost of my blood work increased as well.
Health insurers must spend at least 85% of their premium dollars on actual healthcare or rebate their customers (actuarial value).
I don't know a single person who got this refund, it was a lie.
Improvements in electronic medical records.
Another change that could have been done with separate legislation and didn't require the ACA to fix it.
Clarity in billing and coverage details
Was this a large enough issue to require action by the federal govt?
CHIP program expanded to cover millions more children
Obama has been telling us for several years that the economy was fixed, why so many people on govt programs? Obama lied to you and didn't fix anything with the poor, he only expanded their #'s with stupid healthcare mandates which employers worked around


Quote:
Some people also consider that Obamacare kept the private insurance market in place to be a benefits. Others consider that to be a major downfall.

What does that even mean, it makes no sense.
blatham
 
  3  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 06:22 pm
To the end of further clarification and full transparency (all the rage these days)...

Through a rigorous process of trial and error, give and take, listen and talk, crime and punishment, live and allow to die miserably and alone in some gutter somewhere, I have cordoned off a number of participants here into a special place. The wall, floor and ceiling padding is recyclable, non-abrasive to even sensitive skin and it's sound-proof. Totally ad-hoc sign above the door - "Naked Ladies Inside!! Trolls get in free".

I have recently noted some discussion as to my chosen way forward at A2K. I want to thank all participants. Comments/opinions have been unfailingly sharp as a tack and some even arrive with a level of internal dignity that might only be matched, perhaps, by a very fat and smelly man having grunty sex with a lowbrow Arkansas prostitute in the back seat of a Gremlin. In a used car lot in Wako, Texas. It's a hundred and eight degrees and the air pollution alert is at 5. It hasn't rained here since Noah. So, thanks all.

Let me just say that my "process" has an exemplar. I just saw this today but the fellow is thinking along the same lines as myself.

Christopher Hitchens deals with a "truther" dude.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNAaDKZ-SuE



layman
 
  -4  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 06:28 pm
@blatham,
Quote:
In a used car lot in Wako, Texas.


What kinda wack-ass spellin is "Wako?"

Trivia: Waco was named for the Wichita Injuns who had some teepees there some years back, by the Mexicans, whose word for wichita is "Hueco." They ended up on a reservation in Oklahoma, where the can drink fire-water all day while playin slots at the Casino when they're not beating their wives.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -3  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 07:12 pm
@blatham,
Ya know, Blather, it's kinda ridiculous for you to run around bitching about "trolls" when all you do in troll 24/7. What's up with that?
layman
 
  -3  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 07:19 pm
Well, OK, then!

Quote:
Sessions announces new conditions for sanctuary cities to get federal money

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced Tuesday that sanctuary cities must give federal immigration authorities access to jails and alert them when someone facing deportation will be released from custody in order to receive certain law enforcement grants.

Sessions for months had been warning jurisdictions they could lose money, just for having rules that limit communication among local police and immigration officials. The new conditions say officials must let Department of Homeland Security employees have access to local jails in order to meet with immigrants and must give them 48 hours' notice before releasing an immigrant wanted by immigration authorities from their custody.

"This is what the American people should be able to expect from their cities and states," Sessions said. "And these long overdue requirements will help us take down MS-13 and other violent transnational gangs, and make our country safer."


You go, Jeff!

Trump should leave poor Jeff be. He's doing a great job.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  5  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 10:03 pm
@Baldimo,
Could've been done without the ACA....but wasn't, for decades.

All of those things I posted were provisions in the ACA.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -3  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 10:20 pm
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:

I object to you including my quote in this list Finn. It has absolutely nothing to do with Laymen being a Trump supporter.


You could have fooled me, but if you say so, I won't argue with you about it.

Quote:
I've placed several people on ignore, and I find myself having much more time to read, learn, and talk about more substantive issues that I would otherwise. Time is valuable and reading a lot of bullshit is a waste of that valuable time.


Not a bad idea. The ignore feature can be a useful tool.

Quote:
This is disgusting to think of and sophomoric. I knew there were the same types of behaviors on either side, but if it's take to the degree that you've laid out then it's absolutely disgusting.


So is letting your head explode over Trump's tweets, and the fact that people don't agree with you.("You" in the generalized sense) Referring to Trumpers as maggots, disreputable liars and any other words that add up to irredeemable deplorables is pretty disgusting too. I realize that not all liberals do this, but those are not the liberal's whose severe consternation the Trumpers enjoy witnessing.

Quote:
So you have no solutions to offer and none to, I suppose, prescribe to yourself or myself. That's disappointing. I'd at least think something as simple as treating others deserving of respect, with respect (and ignoring those who deserved to be ignored) would be helpful.


What possible solution is there? I feel confident that you must agree that insults are not going to change anyone's mind about Trump or really any subject, so you must be disappointed that I contend that respectful dialog or an actual conversation will not be successful in changing the minds of Trumpers. Did you really think it might? Would it successfully change your mind about Hillary Clinton? I'm certainly not arguing against respectful dialog or an actual conversation, simply pointing out that in this forum, and on most (political) topics (especially Trump) it's really no more effective in changing minds than insults. It's not harmful and it is helpful in terms of making the experience here more enjoyable, but its not at all transformative.

As well, a great many people who believe they are engaging in respectful dialog or an actual conversation seem to be a lot more capable of detecting sarcasm, condescension, and insult in what others write than in what they write. If they are certain though that what they write is free of such things, it might be helpful if they credited that the other person might very well feel exactly the same way.


Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 10:54 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:


As if it mattered. At all. Ever.


Well it did and does, but, honestly, only so much. This is still only an internet forum after all. Perhaps if we had a opportunity to have a few beer together..But if I read a past post of yours correctly, you live in Maine and I never go to the NE for anything but business and I have no business in Maine (Recently spent a week on business in NYC, and I didn't like it at all, but that's a topic for another thread)

Quote:
No, it wasn't "one critical post"; it's the cumulative effect of your personalizing every difference of opinion and your armchair psychoanalysis of someone who you don't even know. I usually find your factual rebuttals interesting and even useful; what bothered me was the effort made to insult me personally because I tried to point out the odd behavior of Trump supporters in light of all the revelations of long-denied meetings between the Trump campaign committee and various Russian agents.


I think you are being over sensitive here, and a bit pouty but I don't want you to feel as if I am insulting you anymore than you already do. I've no desire either to go through the "Well what about when you wrote..." routine. Suffice it to say we both feel we have been insulted by each other at times. One, both,or neither of us are correct, but it's not worth a lot of calories searching for The Truth.

Quote:
I don't particularly care to read personal attacks on you by liberals or personal attacks on liberals by people on the other side. I don't like the name-calling and insulting people's views by distorting their online monikers.


I certainly didn't argue that you did. I tried to be clear about why I provided those examples, but if you don't like them, imagine how their targets feel about them, and you might have a better understanding of why Trumpers enjoy getting in the heads of those who write them.

Quote:
blatham's nationality is of no concern to me. He's the one who started the thread, that's all. He finds interesting articles and comments on them. I mentioned a long time ago that I wish there were more scholarly articles posted by Trump supporters instead of the incessant fake news stories and ugly Hillary photos. That's why I often found your posts a breath of fresh (albeit right-wing) air.


I have absolutely no concern about blatham's nationality either. I do find it interesting that a Canadian is leading the Resistance here on A2K, but not troubling in any way. I like Canadians and two of my best friends are Canadian...although one moved there as an adult form Belfast, and the other emigrated there from Liverpool about ten years ago so I'm not sure if they are, technically, Canadians. Neither have become citizens. As for Blatham of the Royal Canadian Mounties, (He was a lot more fun when he used a Mountie figure as his icon) I sometimes wonder if he really is Canadian or even lives there, because I can't recall the last time I saw him comment on anything in terms of Canadian politics. ( It does though appear that you may have, again, taken my sardonicism too literally.)

Quote:
(I was an early supporter of Webb and hated watching the inevitable coronation of Clinton...)


I'm pretty sure I would have voted for Webb if he had been the nominee. If he ever runs again, I expect it will be as a 3rd Party candidate.

Quote:
Actually I had more savage disagreements with people on the old PUP threads than I ever did with the Bush supporters at the time. Nothing like internecine warfare!

I may respond to your comments about the MSM (which are much more interesting than reading about people's perceived character flaws) when I have more time.


I hope you do I find the subject more interesting than people's character flaws too. (BTW - Having a stick up your ass isn't a character flaw, it's a physical affliction)
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -3  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 11:05 pm
@ossobucotemp,
ossobucotemp wrote:

I'm a Trump avoidant person, in my way. I have tried hard to avoid his image, which rather galls me. This is hard to do, the image being all over the place, including news articles. I still run into the image something like 30 times a day, or it seems that much.

<Fomenting of swear words>


What galls you? His image or your trying to avoid it? Your desire to avoid his image isn't particularly galling, but it is futile if you intend to continue to stay informed on current events. He is the president you know. Images of the president tend to be on the news quite a lot. It was that way with Obama and it will be that way with whomever comes after Trump.

The difference between an aversion to Trump's visage and Obama's is that the latter was considered by quite a few people to be an indication of racism, especially if the aversion was to that smug Il Duce pose of his. A clear sign of an aversion to an uppity black man don't you know? Just like calling him an wannabe elite.

http://www.stripersonline.com/content/type/61/id/1537131/width/1000/height/1000



layman
 
  -2  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 11:08 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
What galls me most about Obama is them big-ass monkey ears of his, ya know? Damn, son.

I think I might like this Mussolini guy. He looks like George C. Scott, who ROCKS!
glitterbag
 
  5  
Tue 25 Jul, 2017 11:15 pm
@jcboy,
He's actually too old to be considered early onset. Alzheimers has afflicted many of the older relatives, but my Mom was the youngest (age 58) to be diagnosed. My Grandmother was 72 when it became obvious she was afflicted.

I absolutely understand you are not insulting or mocking mental illness or dementia. If anyone really had a choice, they would never hope for such things. What grieves me is the blind endorsement of a vainglorious attention hog who will never quit until he nullify's every poor soul who gets close to his twisted orbit. I honestly don't know if he is suffering from mental illness, dementia or desire to be the absolute ruler of the world. I know, I know it sounds extreme, but he wouldn't be the first person to cheat his way into a position of power and get drunk on the fumes,
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.55 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 10:59:12