leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 24 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: Certainly we are not going to agree . As I said, if you believe what Trump tells you, you are going to come away with a much different impression than if you don't believe the guy or his cabinet. Many of these upbeat statements or assertions or accusations of his are unknowns at this point. Time will tell if what he has been telling us is true. Hopefully one of us will see it more clearly later and we can back slap and mock someone together. You are right, I don't know a lot of the OBAMA lies that pissed you off. If you care to discuss further go ahead. I don't see killing the ACA as a positive goal. Several years back my wife and I fell right into the circumstances that bankrupted many - expensive treatments, pre-existing conditions, followed by job loss. Candidate Trump promised us better, cheaper health care with coverage for pre-existing conditions. His plan today is to kill the ACA...and replace that coverage with? He has stated no real replacement plan but....what, maybe after the next election he will reveal the plan? You have told me how upsetting that surveillance on the Trump campaign by the FBI under Obama was to you. Understood. What you have yet to tell me is, if that was such a widespread spying operation, as is implied by you and Trump both, where are the fruits of the investigations? What all was done with this evidence, specifically? I put FISA 'mistakes' in quotes as they may not be mistakes. I approve of the investigations. Find out what happened. Hold those accountable for misdeeds. Clear? Now, this is tougher to follow.....If there was a subset of FBI and/or CIA officials that were behind the supposed 'coup plot' in 2016, they manipulated/manufactured the whole tale that Trump was involved with Russians to get himself elected. They made him look like a possible traitor, is that basically correct? If that is what happened, how can you blame people, posters, politicians, or even media outlets for seeing the publicly available evidence and concluding that he might, in fact, be involved with the Russians. If what we saw on the surface was true, not investigating would be irresponsible. I don't agree that Mueller produced nothing. I don't agree that every bit of Trump-Russia evidence was innocent or manufactured but if that is the story you believe, concluding that everyone that bought the story was hateful or unreasonably out to get Donnie, is not really logical. We've reached the end here sir. I'm truly sorry to hear about the medical issues and health care coverage. I think you know that already. What I can offer in that regard is only that everything that happened there was part of the over-managed, over-regulated system set in place by the politicians in the state where you receive care. Everything--everything starts with the state and its requirements.it always has been that way. There are obvious problems with our health care system, but at the end of the day the total disregard for actuarial science is where it all starts. You can't solve a problem that involves both people AND mathematics by creating a new system that ignores the math totally. I acknowledge health care seems to be a non-issue at this point. Could focus on proving he's not a traitor for 3 years be part of the challenge? Could that be part or the dem strategy? You've seen the House and Senate and where there attentions have been focused. You are correct--the last part was tough to follow. Impossible in fact. It belies virtually everything we know now about the Russia investigation. Could people believe that it was a big innocent misunderstanding and Trump is guilty in spite of what came out, or that Comey and Brennan are the true heroes of the take, and that the FISA "mistakes" actually represent the truth? Diabetics skip insulin shots. People with heart conditions allow themselves to become obese. Pat's fans think the cheaters don't cheat. Of course people will think that way. I'm not one of those people. 4
3rdnlng Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 16 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: We've reached the end here sir. I'm truly sorry to hear about the medical issues and health care coverage. I think you know that already. What I can offer in that regard is only that everything that happened there was part of the over-managed, over-regulated system set in place by the politicians in the state where you receive care. Everything--everything starts with the state and its requirements.it always has been that way. There are obvious problems with our health care system, but at the end of the day the total disregard for actuarial science is where it all starts. You can't solve a problem that involves both people AND mathematics by creating a new system that ignores the math totally. I acknowledge health care seems to be a non-issue at this point. Could focus on proving he's not a traitor for 3 years be part of the challenge? Could that be part or the dem strategy? You've seen the House and Senate and where there attentions have been focused. You are correct--the last part was tough to follow. Impossible in fact. It belies virtually everything we know now about the Russia investigation. Could people believe that it was a big innocent misunderstanding and Trump is guilty in spite of what came out, or that Comey and Brennan are the true heroes of the take, and that the FISA "mistakes" actually represent the truth? Diabetics skip insulin shots. People with heart conditions allow themselves to become obese. Pat's fans think the cheaters don't cheat. Of course people will think that way. I'm not one of those people. This is spot on. Back when we were debating the ACA before its inception I had two major objections to it. (1) It ignored the "Law of Large Numbers" which is the basis for all insurance. (2) The people implementing the ACA were incompetent. 2
IDBillzFan Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 13 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: This is spot on. Back when we were debating the ACA before its inception I had two major objections to it. (1) It ignored the "Law of Large Numbers" which is the basis for all insurance. (2) The people implementing the ACA were incompetent. I had two different major objection to it: (1) It was mandatory. You HAD to get health insurance. You were being forced by the government to buy a product, regardless of whether you wanted it. (2) The law exempted the very people who wrote it, passed it and forced it on the rest of us. 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 16 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: This is spot on. Back when we were debating the ACA before its inception I had two major objections to it. (1) It ignored the "Law of Large Numbers" which is the basis for all insurance. (2) The people implementing the ACA were incompetent. Deliberately incompetent imo.
Rob's House Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 (edited) "Assume that the trial we were discussing was to determine if the accused had raped your daughter" I want to address this sentence, not in relation to Bob personally or even his post specifically, but to this rhetorical device generally. If someone is accused of raping my daughter I am not going to be rational. I am going to be fueled by emotion rather than reason. If an argument requires me to be irrational to accept it then it isn't a good argument. 2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Were those people Eric Ciaramella and Sean Misko? Edited February 4, 2020 by Rob's House 5
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 3 hours ago, Bob in Mich said: You don't have enough to reply to and have to butt in here too? lol I guess it wasn't on topic if you want to change the topic to Kavanaugh....again with the Kavanaugh. I will have to find that last discussion. Rape itself was not my point either, just a circumstance where it would be apparent to most that, motivations for witnesses would be 180 degrees from today's Repubs in Senate trial. When I wrote it, we were discussing wanting to pursue more witnesses, like Bolton, versus claiming we shouldn't because the House didn't get his testimony. So, on topic? Yes, spot on my topic, not on the Kavanaugh topic of yours though. Ok, I'll admit I'm still laughing about butting in. However, you compared a father dealing with his daughter's assault in a criminal trial with wanting to tune to the All Bolton All the time channel on Sirius Xm Impeachment radio. Yes, they are similar because each deals with people talking, but they have little else in common. Hence, off topic. 1
Bray Wyatt Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: Here's the full RP statement: The comments in that twitter thread make Tibs look like a genius, my god 3 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 3 hours ago, 3rdnlng said: This is spot on. Back when we were debating the ACA before its inception I had two major objections to it. (1) It ignored the "Law of Large Numbers" which is the basis for all insurance. (2) The people implementing the ACA were incompetent. Unfortunately, some people are conditioned to believe that cheap is good, health care should cost next to nothing, and the the health care companies call all the shots. And by the way, I’m not pro-health insurance companies, they are part of the problem as well. At the same time, some of those people see tremendous value in the latest iPhone, internet service, jail house ink and the latest car with all the gadgets. Politicians know that and treat the health care system accordingly. By the nature of the process nothing can happen that is outside the regulation and/or pricing structure allowed by regulation. At least, not without penalty. Yet, many want to turn it over to the regulators to work their magic. Dumb, dumb dumb. I am going to go out on a limb here and say there is so much money going through the system that reasonably priced, catastrophic insurance plan with reasonable out of pockets—-regulated reasonably, is certainly doable. It would have to start with elimination of the taxpayer funded plans extended to public employees, redefining what reasonable cost is, and that does not appear likely to ever happen. 1
B-Man Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 1 hour ago, Golden Goat said: Well done by Susan Collins! For those who didn't know, She announced that she was voting for acquittal on both counts. The democrats had every chance to try and prove that the POTUS broke the law, they could not....................just sour grapes. . 6 1
Foxx Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 4 minutes ago, B-Man said: For those who didn't know, She announced that she was voting for acquittal on both counts. The democrats had every chance to try and prove that the POTUS broke the law, they could not....................just sour grapes. . i've been looking for the clip but haven't been able to find it just yet.
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 3 minutes ago, B-Man said: For those who didn't know, She announced that she was voting for acquittal on both counts. The democrats had every chance to try and prove that the POTUS broke the law, they could not....................just sour grapes. . ...WHOA!!....a.MAJOR time out.......Photo Op Chuck the Schmuck Schumer said, "we will NOT accept the Senate's acquittal of President Trump"......yet another one of our NYS turds...... 1 1
Golden Goat Posted February 4, 2020 Posted February 4, 2020 20 minutes ago, Foxx said: i've been looking for the clip but haven't been able to find it just yet. 2 4
Bob in Mich Posted February 5, 2020 Posted February 5, 2020 21 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: We've reached the end here sir. I'm truly sorry to hear about the medical issues and health care coverage. I think you know that already. What I can offer in that regard is only that everything that happened there was part of the over-managed, over-regulated system set in place by the politicians in the state where you receive care. Everything--everything starts with the state and its requirements.it always has been that way. There are obvious problems with our health care system, but at the end of the day the total disregard for actuarial science is where it all starts. You can't solve a problem that involves both people AND mathematics by creating a new system that ignores the math totally. I acknowledge health care seems to be a non-issue at this point. Could focus on proving he's not a traitor for 3 years be part of the challenge? Could that be part or the dem strategy? You've seen the House and Senate and where there attentions have been focused. You are correct--the last part was tough to follow. Impossible in fact. It belies virtually everything we know now about the Russia investigation. Could people believe that it was a big innocent misunderstanding and Trump is guilty in spite of what came out, or that Comey and Brennan are the true heroes of the take, and that the FISA "mistakes" actually represent the truth? Diabetics skip insulin shots. People with heart conditions allow themselves to become obese. Pat's fans think the cheaters don't cheat. Of course people will think that way. I'm not one of those people. Len, I agree with your take that most of this has been discussed but in the spirit of the last word...... Healthcare - just seems that the Dems and Repubs differ on the availability of healthcare to poor people. Even for those people that cannot afford it, Dems have been aspiring to provide some level of care before the sick/poor drop over on their way to an emergency room. Repubs seem content with the current employer based care. The ACA had several big issues but it appeared the plan was taking a first swipe at covering all....and personally, the pre-existing condition coverage was important to me. Any legislated program of that size is going to need fixes as we see the problems in practice. If I recall, the Repubs have blocked improvement attempts and are well on the way to undoing it. I have no problem with anyone that wants to point out the flaws with the ACA. Philosophically, I disagree with those that are content with the pre-ACA med insurance practices. Funny how you so vehemently opposed my description of what happened with Trump/Russia. As most know, I think there was enough actual smoke there to investigate but that is not my point here. I was trying to lay out your side of what happened and somehow you saw something totally different in my question. For discussion, I was allowing that there was a deep state plot and that they totally framed a saintly Trump. BRB, gotta go puke....lol So, bearing in mind that I am attempting, for discussion purposes, to agree that some deep state FBI/CIA types manufactured the evidence to produce the above mentioned smoke, how can you blame the average person for believing the story the deep state put together? This is the original text from above: Now, this is tougher to follow.....If there was a subset of FBI and/or CIA officials that were behind the supposed 'coup plot' in 2016, they manipulated/manufactured the whole tale that Trump was involved with Russians to get himself elected. They made him look like a possible traitor, is that basically correct? If that is what happened, how can you blame people, posters, politicians, or even media outlets for seeing the publicly available evidence and concluding that he might, in fact, be involved with the Russians. If what we saw on the surface was true, not investigating would be irresponsible. I don't agree that Mueller produced nothing. I don't agree that every bit of Trump-Russia evidence was innocent or manufactured but if that is the story you believe, concluding that everyone that bought the story was hateful or unreasonably out to get Donnie, is not really logical. I won't be hurt if you are talked out on these issues. Reply or not, I will manage.
Foxx Posted February 5, 2020 Posted February 5, 2020 (edited) https://twitter.com/verykate45/status/1224919008618647552 *************************************************************************** 1 hour ago, Bob in Mich said: ...Now, this is tougher to follow.....If there was a subset of FBI and/or CIA officials that were behind the supposed 'coup plot' in 2016, they manipulated/manufactured the whole tale that Trump was involved with Russians to get himself elected. They made him look like a possible traitor, is that basically correct? If that is what happened, how can you blame people, posters, politicians, or even media outlets for seeing the publicly available evidence and concluding that he might, in fact, be involved with the Russians. If what we saw on the surface was true, not investigating would be irresponsible. I don't agree that Mueller produced nothing. I don't agree that every bit of Trump-Russia evidence was innocent or manufactured but if that is the story you believe, concluding that everyone that bought the story was hateful or unreasonably out to get Donnie, is not really logical.... the only way one could even possibly come away with the impression that Trump colluded with the Russians is because they took what the propaganda press stuffed down their throats everyday. had one had the temerity to do even just a small dive into the facts that were readily available, they would have understood that it was a false narrative. Edited February 5, 2020 by Foxx 1 1 1
Recommended Posts