APP - FINALLY!

belme1201 said:
What I said about Medicare is that it is more efficient than the private sector in the cost of admininstering care for those enrolled, that fact remains. It also has the highest approval from those within it.
Your GOP friends are using the threat of loss of Medicare coverage as their current political ploy, can they have it both ways? It's good but on the other hand, it's awful?
You, use restrictions placed on it by your gang in the Part D to claim inefficiency such as overpaying for drugs, even though they were forbidden to negotiate for lower drug prices by your boys, going even further to make it illlegal to buy drugs out of the country at lower prices. Add to that the $1/2 trillion in additional unfunded costs added by your friends and BillyTauzin(R-LA now heading the industry Lobby) in a pharma boondoggle. The fact remains that fraud in the system is from the outside, not within.
I have asked what your solution would be, I have heard nothing. I fear your solution for Medicare would be to destroy it simply because it has a 'D' attached. Kill the patient, save the disease!
The GAO report I quoted stated the Pentagon was the most wasteful department of government. I gave numbers. Military acquisition is the largest boondoggle in the history of man, given the size of their budget. Iraq, estimated at "possibly$15 billion but I doubt it" by Rummy, this year reached $830 billion alone... OFF BUDGET! Sec. Gates recently made a similar comment about military waste. Our perspectives differ but I never said anything other than what I said above.
Click to expand...

Very good post. Not that facts will do anything to convince certain ones on the right. Fact has little to do with faith based zealots.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I made no assertions about page 150 or page 149...I made an assertion about page 65, but for some reason you chose to respond to someone else's
assertion about page 65.....

Stop acting dumb....or if you are dumb my sympathies. These are all related to each other because "any employee" can hire union folk....the answers to the lies of 149 and 150 directly contradict the lie of #65 . PAY ATTENTION!

is that because you weren't able to find something to cut and paste that was responsive to my question?.....




just give it a shot once, Touchie......read the text on page 65, think about it, formulate a response....type it down, hit send....share your wisdom with the world......Are you actually that deluded to think that repeating this lame dodge of yours will make it valid?

if it is any help to you, I will admit the response you did reply to is wrong....they complained that "Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans".....in truth, taxpayers will subsidize only those employer paid plans that the government appointed board accepts.....my question is, why are we subsidizing any at all......
Click to expand...

No, that is YOUR truth, that's NOT what is being proposed. Once again, the PostModernFool wants to impress HIS interpretation over what is actually being presented....and he fails as usual.

Just Plain Politics! - View Single Post - APP - FINALLY!
 
Last edited:
Damocles said:
So sexy that trees commit suicide upon realizing I'm never going to even hug them?

;)

(And I'm humble too!)
Click to expand...

humble reminds me of bumble, which reminds me of bees. Which reminds me of fresh honey. Which reminds me of kudos at your choices and recompense for such. ;)
 
Taichiliberal said:
No, that is YOUR truth, that's NOT what is being proposed. Once again, the PostModernFool wants to impress HIS interpretation over what is actually being presented....and he fails as usual.
Click to expand...

did you read the article from the Detroit Free Press regarding the $10 billion being set aside for the UAW?.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
did you read the article from the Detroit Free Press regarding the $10 billion being set aside for the UAW?.....
Click to expand...

Actually caught it on Bloomberg radio. Here's a print version......when analyzed, it's NOT out of the ordinary regarding the trend of agreements between the unions, the auto-industry management and the gov't that began during the Shrub's last year in office. Essentially, it's not refuting what Christies' source debunked.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601209&sid=aiMwk.T6AeXQ
 
Taichiliberal said:
Actually caught it on Bloomberg radio. Here's a print version......when analyzed, it's NOT out of the ordinary regarding the trend of agreements between the unions, the auto-industry management and the gov't that began during the Shrub's last year in office.
Click to expand...
I will take that as an admission that it is a stupid thing to do.....

Essentially, it's not refuting what Christies' source debunked.
Click to expand...
????....essentially, it underscores the fact that Christie's source didn't debunk anything......Christie's source did nothing except claim it wasn't true.....this article shows it is......
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Actually caught it on Bloomberg radio. Here's a print version......when analyzed, it's NOT out of the ordinary regarding the trend of agreements between the unions, the auto-industry management and the gov't that began during the Shrub's last year in office.
Click to expand...

PostmodernProphet said:
I will take that as an admission that it is a stupid thing to do.....

You can take the next train to Altoona, for all I care. The link I gave gives a pretty good analysis of the situation, and it sure as hell DOES NOT support the one note mantra that you and other stubborn yahoos storming town meetings are claiming....or your bizarre interpretations. You don't like it? Give a better alternative that is NOT akin to the current status quo.


Essentially, it's not refuting what Christies' source debunked.
Click to expand...

????....essentially, it underscores the fact that Christie's source didn't debunk anything......Christie's source did nothing except claim it wasn't true.....this article shows it is......
Click to expand...

Man, you are stubborn to the point of insipideness. First you refuse to acknowledge that your point regarding the #65 was wrong, and now your trying to avoid admitting that the Bloomberg article does NOT support YOUR contentions. No matter, the objective reader can follow the posts, read the links and see your folly. As for me, I'd like to see the final versions that are going to come out of Congress and the Senate...but in the meantime I'll just keep skeet shooting the neocon clay pidgens trying to pretend they're real. Carry on.
 
Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
First you refuse to acknowledge that your point regarding the #65 was wrong, and now your trying to avoid admitting that the Bloomberg article does NOT support YOUR contentions.
Click to expand...

obviously I would refuse to admit such foolishness....now, can you explain why the UAW is expecting to receive $10 billion to bail out their benefits program under the act?.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
obviously I would refuse to admit such foolishness....now, can you explain why the UAW is expecting to receive $10 billion to bail out their benefits program under the act?.....
Click to expand...

Been there, done that...you won't discuss what was presented, but just keep parroting your question. Sorry, but sometimes your BS supporting your convoluted "logic" just gets old. Let me know when you're actually ready to discuss the topic honestly instead repeating your BS and then using that BS to make false claims/allegations. If you can't, and opt for some stupid final salvo, then I'd say we're done here.
 
now that we've all concluded that Taich has been pwned, can any one else explain why the bill includes a provision bailing out union benefit plans at a higher level than anyone else in the government plan?......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top