muff528

Yeah, instead of "after" I should say something like "as a result of". 300000000+ people. How many are right now (12 days into the law) "covered" by some form of ACA-compliant "insurance"? (signed up, premiums paid, coverage in effect) How many of these are now being treated under their ACA-compliant policies? How many of 300M are covered under policies which have been exempted by decree from "minimum coverage" requirements? Presumably, these are policies which are not contributing to the "pool" of money which funds procedures which are covered under the minimum standards of the ACA. (for example, with my ACA-compliant plan, I am paying for obstetric and gyn. coverage for my son and myself, thereby contributing to the collective for services we will never receive.) How do folks who have lost coverage and have not yet been able to replace that insurance receive medical care for illnesses they have right now? HHS is cooing over a million here, a few hundred thou there logging on and signing up at healthcare dot gov. A few do follow though but many are looking at the prices and bailing out. Long way to go to get to full compliance, even though it has been the law of the land for 12 days. Also - I see a little humor in claims by Obama and Sebelius that the number of folks trying to sign up and jamming the website is indicative of the popular demand for this abomination. They are trying to sign up because it's the freaking law! That is why. People generally try to follow the law.

WRONG. INCORRECT. FALSE. You should check your facts BEFORE making an ass of yourself. I can't be right or wrong yet. I'm only making a prediction.

Decisions for whether some types of expensive medical care we're never made by the family, the doctor or the patient. These decisions were made by the insurance company or their appeals board. Guess which way they leaned 99% of the time? 99% ??? Cite. If their decisions were based strictly on economic considerations, they need to be sued. The patient either was or was not covered for a given procedure or treatment. Experimental or non-standard treatments could be considered by a "life-panel" to evaluate whether a high-risk procedure might be a viable option (on a case-by-case basis). I am predicting that all (100%) of these decisions will be based on economic considerations in the future. All "insurance" plans (except those specifically and unlawfully exempted by Obama's decrees) are now required to comply with the provisions of the ACA, no matter how idiotic some of those provisions may be. I'm not predicting how healthcare will be delivered in the future. I'm predicting how bureaucrats will do their jobs. I have over 200 years of historical evidence of how their jobs evolve. I'm assuming that you think this case would have had a different outcome after the ACA.

The difference is that before the ACA, these decisions were made by insurance companies, doctors and patients/families with some consideration for the patient. After ACA, they will be made by government bureaucrats for the benefit of the ACA and the collective ...not the patient. The parameters for these end-of-treatment decisions will eventually become formulaic so no "person" can be held responsible for making these decisions. Just plug in age, diet, medical history, dangerous activities, bad habits, etc. Out pops the decision. "Sorry, nothing can be done about it. The computer says 'no'. Let me refer you to a list of ACA-approved undertakers. Here's a nice printout of some lillies. Next!".

Isn't that an argument to never treat anybody for anything? It's also predicated on the assumption that the only value people have is economic. We'd have a pretty bleak world if it ran on your values. Don Who says this is lawrocket's values? It simply looks like a "big-picture, down-the-road" glimpse of the "values" of the ACA. Death panels (in some form or other) will be necessary and are predictable. People will necessarily have only economic (and maybe political) value WRT the ACA. That's the only way it can be "affordable". If anyone thinks that those in power who are using the IRS or the bridge traffic people to attack political enemies are scary, just wait till they start using the ACA as a weapon.

Yeah, that's going to be a big loss for UCF. I was hoping he'd stay another year. I think another season like this one would give UCF a lot more respect as a national contender. But, we'll see. I enjoy going to their home games ...a lot of spirited energy in that stadium.

That's one possibility, though not the only one as I made clear. However, if that's the one you prefer to go with, have fun with that. Don Yes, I see you've given him the benefit of the doubt ...in a back-handed sorta way. BTW - I wonder what Reid's plans are after his political career is over. (sometimes I crack myself up )

Of course.... what a self-serving douchebag!

...and in other news: you see effffff!!! GO KNIGHTS!

That is EXACTLY what I had to do to change a bulb on my 2011 Subaru Outback. My wife's Prius requires removing the radiator support and the use of a mirror to change the headlight bulb. I wasn't aware that Subarus and Toyotas were designed in Britain. Subaru must've only recently hired the Brit design team. I can change the bulb on my '03 Outback from under the hood.

Boner killer. "Who's there!? Are you a sex criminal!?" "Nobody wants to do that to you, Ma!"

That's only one thing.

Plessy vs. Ferguson Dred Scott vs. Sandford Turns out the SC was wrong in both decisions. Just because the SC appointed themselves the arbiters of "constitutionality" doesn't mean they were right about that, either. A lot of folks have had to live (and die) by some of their idiotic, anti-constitutional decisions over the years.

No worries!! I'm in a smacker mood this morning. Hmmmm... that could be bad or that could be good ...or that could be good in a bad kinda way.

I hope you don't think I was responding to your post. I was just chiming in with my least favorite word.

Jersey Girl is a term for a tough chick. I'm just a prepster surfer girl at heart. Big difference. I'm not gonna win this one so I'm stopping now... Whatever.

Maybe it was labeled "Inflammable".

You broke open another six-pack, didn't you. I think what she intended to post was: Places I want to get kinky. That's how I read it.

You broke open another six-pack, didn't you.

Well, according to the story, they have a suspect in custody and he's been charged with 2nd degree murder.

Ummm.... Now that right there is pretty funny!

That's cool! Is the farm still there? Can you land off? LOL Actually, my sisters and I just recently sold it. But, sometimes we would fly over the place during climbout from Zhills and from time to time we discussed doing a demo there but it never materialized. I think there was some extra effort required because of some issue with Tampa ATC and the place being west of Hwy 39. I even tried to talk some of the ultralight guys across the highway into letting me do a bandit jump there but, at the time, no one would go along with the idea. Ironically, there is now a tandem mill DZ operating at that same ultralight airfield. My parents did a pretty good job keeping Zhills hidden from my brother and me. It took a while, but we eventually found it.

Grandaddy was a farmer. That picture was taken just a few miles south of Zhills.

Just don't forget that old saying: "F will get you 14"!