idrankwhat
-
Content
4,211 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never -
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by idrankwhat
-
I LIKE Fortran Continue I like broadswords
-
Hey, you rabid "right to life"ers out there. What's your take on the issue? Just curious.
-
That won't work. If you try a blanket cut then the private contractors will maintain their slice of the waste and the cuts will actually affect troop supplies and equipment. That way the headline will read "politician X endangers troops". IMO the cuts need to be targeted specifically and implemented VERY publicly. We should start by forcing all IT contractors to explain why they can't transition off of FORTRAN and COBOL. The Pentagon bookkeeping is so messed up that it literally cannot be audited. Too many people are making too much money trying to maintain the confusing status quo. We waste more money than other countries spend for their entire military budgets.
-
Obama health insurance requirement taken from GOP
idrankwhat replied to Lucky...'s topic in Speakers Corner
Actually a whole lot of the plan was taken from the GOP. http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Graphics/2010/022310-Bill-comparison.aspx -
I thought this thread could use a post that's on topic. I agree with lawrocket. This is great news. It should even save us a substantial chunk of change if implemented properly. This visual aid comes to mind. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bJsGJhpZd8
-
Don't worry Mike. I didn't expect you to.
-
I'm not saying that her map was the reason for the recent attacks but it certainly could be seen as throwing fuel on a fire that she's been helping to build for over a year. I'd argue that Beck's rhetoric would likely be more related to the recent attacks. There's a lot of deliberate misinformation being thrown around along with a lot of very angry rhetoric. When you're speaking to a pitchfork carrying mob you have a choice as to how you handle the situation. So far, they've been dangerously irresponsible IMO.
-
I suppose it's possible that it was a rabid lefty but I wouldn't put money on it.
-
Then simply look at the title of the thread, do a news search on violence and the health care bill, and then look at the attached pic that was posted on Palin's site. Decide for yourself if you think there's a problem. People in the public eye need to realize (or at least try to) the potential consequences of their actions.
-
This is common and needs to be brought up more often in the national dialog.
-
3-2-1
-
What the fuck I'm talking about is your heroin placing targets on the locations referring to legislators. Then the rally call. Sure, you'll denounce the targets as purely political locations, but all it takes to stir up tea bagging trash is shit like that, that's what the fuck I'm talking about. What a waste of oxygen.... Hardly. Yesterday some tea baggers posted the address of one of our Congressman on their website(actually they got it wrong and posted his brother's address). Someone came by and cut gas lines at his house. Is this the new face of "conservatism"?
-
Mind if I save this quote for later?
-
The problem with the bill is that it had to be approved by the HC lobbyists before it could even see the light of day. Obama met with the insurers and made significant concessions (no buying drugs from Canada, no bargaining for bulk pricing, no single payer debate) so that they would not crush this legislation right off the bat. The insurers didn't like being dragged through the mud but they certainly don't hate this bill and it is no threat to their livelihood. Sure, they'd rather have free rein (or reign) over the industry but they're quite happy with 30-50 million more guaranteed customers. As for the HC workers' opinions on the bill, one of the reasons given in the poll of Dr.s who supported the public option was that with the government program the paperwork was easier. Having different procedures for numerous companies makes things more complicated and therefore, more expensive.
-
I do listen occasionally. And each time I've had my views of him confirmed. He's an arrogant, loud mouthed, hypocritical ideologue (based on a failed ideology) who has learned that he can charge "confiscatory" advertising rates to advertisers by appealing to the political gamesmanship fetishes of an audience of head-nodding, table pounding dittoheads. It's a form of brain draining entertainment that's quite lucrative for him but bad for the country. "Radio crack" if you will
-
I still want to know why people pay her to talk. She's all incite and no insight. I guess some Canadian Universities wanted to make the news this week.
-
Next page in the thread, taken from the same poll: * In Nevada, only 34% support the Senate bill, while 56% support the public option. * In Illinois, only 37% support the Senate bill, while 68% support the public option. * In Washington State, only 38% support the Senate bill, while 65% support the public option. * In Missouri, only 33% support the Senate bill, while 57% support the public option. * In Virginia, only 36% support the Senate bill, while 61% support the public option. * In Iowa, only 35% support the Senate bill, while 62% support the public option. *In Minnesota, only 35% support the Senate bill, while 62% support the public option. * In Colorado, only 32% support the Senate bill, while 58% support the public option Another puts the figure at
-
Ok.... that one's just too easy... haha.... I see what you are getting at but I tend to read as opposed to watch news channels and the non biased polls show that the majority was not for the public option. Not sure what happened to my earlier reply. I'm a bit busy this morning. Sorry for the brevity. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3810977;search_string=public%20option;#3810977 Ok... but that is one state. Actually it's not. Keep reading the thread. The ~60% support figure keeps coming up in poll after poll.
-
Except that they are also being guaranteed a new few million customers. So there should be a continual upward trend.
-
Ok.... that one's just too easy... haha.... I see what you are getting at but I tend to read as opposed to watch news channels and the non biased polls show that the majority was not for the public option. Not sure what happened to my earlier reply. I'm a bit busy this morning. Sorry for the brevity. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3810977;search_string=public%20option;#3810977
-
That's not what this legislation does. Banks can still make loans. So these banks can't survive in the free market without a government hand out? The above is an argument for taxpayer funded welfare.
-
How? This should do just the opposite. All this legislation will do is to cut out the middle man. Now, instead of the government paying subsidies to banks to disburse the funds it will do it on its own. Banks were receiving origination subsidies from the feds AND charging students origination fees. It will be cheaper. The only people losing out are the corporate welfare recipients.
-
That's in the reconciliation bill that hasn't passed yet. When it does it will be one of the best things the government has done in quite a while. By ending some corporate welfare to the banks it will not only save the fees it pays out to the banks but will be a source of revenue to the Treasury AND increase the amount of money available to college students. Republican lawmakers have vowed to try to crush it.
-
How much you want to bet most if not all of it was due to insurance company gains - you know, those people you were ranting about charging so much? Hardly the reaction that one would expect after a "government takeover".
-
That's a good argument for single payer.