Coming to a hospital near you, sign up now.

UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Winter Woman said:
Sometimes it hurts when it is true. But if you want to debate that go to that thread. This is about healthcare.
Click to expand...
you say it's true that blacks need whites to feed them? please account for this magical property of melanin.

woops, White. sorry about that.
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
EDIT: I believe I heard the other day that the US is the only industrialized nation whose prescription medications have increased over the years, instead of decreased..Big Pharma is a scoundrel and one THE major reasons why weed is not legal..

Once everyone has been on this after 24 months..I'd like to take a poll and see who would like to give it up?

Remember Social Security??????? Want to give that up???? the 'Pubs fought as hard as they did and I can't find ONE who want to give it up..

the ACA also closes up the "donut hole" with medicare part d which is a BIG bone of contention with seniors..
Click to expand...
A BLaST FROM THE LAST TIME THERE WAS A HEALTHCARE DEBATE

December 2, 1993 - Leading conservative operative William Kristol privately circulates a strategy document to Republicans in Congress. Kristol writes that congressional Republicans should work to "kill" -- not amend -- the Clinton plan because it presents a real danger to the Republican future: Its passage will give the Democrats a lock on the crucial middle-class vote and revive the reputation of the party. Nearly a full year before Republicans will unite behind the "Contract With America," Kristol has provided the rationale and the steel for them to achieve their aims of winning control of Congress and becoming America's majority party. Killing health care will serve both ends. The timing of the memo dovetails with a growing private consensus among Republicans that all-out opposition to the Clinton plan is in their best political interest. Until the memo surfaces, most opponents prefer behind-the-scenes warfare largely shielded from public view. The boldness of Kristol's strategy signals a new turn in the battle. Not only is it politically acceptable to criticize the Clinton plan on policy grounds, it is also politically advantageous. By the end of 1993, blocking reform poses little risk as the public becomes increasingly fearful of what it has heard about the Clinton plan.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/may96/background/health_debate_page2.html
 
Winter Woman

Winter Woman

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
you say it's true that blacks need whites to feed them? please account for this magical property of melanin.

woops, White. sorry about that.
Click to expand...
Go to that thread if you want to debate it. It's is just another attempt to bait and switch. Oh, excuse me bait and snitch.
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
What it seems to come down to is people who have pre-existing conditions are really happy that other people have to pay for them now...

Screw the young healthy people, they deserve it!!
Click to expand...
let me explain a little about pre-existing..unless you have continuous health insurance..the new insurance company you apply to, can go through your medical records (everything is electronic) and not cover you for items because during the time you were uninsured you may have had any of those items re-occur..even in as little as 30 days of no coverage. So, you may have been treated in the past, not have the condition any longer but the insurance company will "carve out" those conditions because you were uninsured for 30 days..do you see, now?
 
S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
A BLaST FROM THE LAST TIME THERE WAS A HEALTHCARE DEBATE

December 2, 1993 - Leading conservative operative William Kristol privately circulates a strategy document to Republicans in Congress. Kristol writes that congressional Republicans should work to "kill" -- not amend -- the Clinton plan because it presents a real danger to the Republican future: Its passage will give the Democrats a lock on the crucial middle-class vote and revive the reputation of the party. Nearly a full year before Republicans will unite behind the "Contract With America," Kristol has provided the rationale and the steel for them to achieve their aims of winning control of Congress and becoming America's majority party. Killing health care will serve both ends. The timing of the memo dovetails with a growing private consensus among Republicans that all-out opposition to the Clinton plan is in their best political interest. Until the memo surfaces, most opponents prefer behind-the-scenes warfare largely shielded from public view. The boldness of Kristol's strategy signals a new turn in the battle. Not only is it politically acceptable to criticize the Clinton plan on policy grounds, it is also politically advantageous. By the end of 1993, blocking reform poses little risk as the public becomes increasingly fearful of what it has heard about the Clinton plan.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/may96/background/health_debate_page2.html
Click to expand...
this is so..red.

republican future?..buahahahahahaaaahahahahahahaaaaaa

yeah, and i heard the other day they're trying to bring the "contract" back because it worked so well before..if you put your hand on a lit stove burner:wall:
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Mindmelted said:
AC is like UB. If you don't think that all problems of other races is not White man's fault then you are labeled a racist.....
Click to expand...
how could anything be the fault of the White man, ever? they have so little melanin comparatively.

melanin is clearly the problem.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Winter Woman said:
Go to that thread if you want to debate it. It's is just another attempt to bait and switch. Oh, excuse me bait and snitch.
Click to expand...
you can't just claim something to be true unequivocally as you just did and then not stand behind it. that is quite the cuntly thing to do.
 
Winter Woman

Winter Woman

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
let me explain a little about pre-existing..unless you have continuous health insurance..the new insurance company you apply to, can go through your medical records (everything is electronic) and not cover you for items because during the time you were uninsured you may have had any of those items re-occur..even in as little as 30 days of no coverage. So, you may have been treated in the past, not have the condition any longer but the insurance company will "carve out" those conditions because you were uninsured for 30 days..do you see, now?
Click to expand...
I thought they already changed the pre-existing clause. Am I wrong?
 
ginwilly

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
let me explain a little about pre-existing..unless you have continuous health insurance..the new insurance company you apply to, can go through your medical records (everything is electronic) and not cover you for items because during the time you were uninsured you may have had any of those items re-occur..even in as little as 30 days of no coverage. So, you may have been treated in the past, not have the condition any longer but the insurance company will "carve out" those conditions because you were uninsured for 30 days..do you see, now?
Click to expand...

Did you know that medicare/caid deny more coverage for pre-existing conditions than all other insurance companies combined? They don't call it pre-existing though, they call it chronic and limit care based on this designation.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
"coming soon to a nation near you"

1. tell horrific story about child being raped while unicorn gets killed and your dog gets hit by a car.

2. say this is what will happen if a republican is elected.

3. be a cunt in general.

4. offer no proof to back up what you say?

5. more general cuntery.

6. ?????

7. PROFIT!!!!!

did i crack the formula, WhiterWoman?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top