- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
America - The Official Thread
- Thread starter ///M-Spec
- 38,983 comments
- 1,695,874 views
Danoff
Premium
- 33,937
- Mile High City
Given the state of Obamacare, I'd settle for exactly as things were before it (not that that was perfect).
- 14,002
- Ireland
- driftking18594
- CiaranGTR94
It's not even in the Senate yet.
BTW, guess which were the 11 states with the highest rates for pre-existing conditions? Here's your answer, and the data supporting it.
And just to continue the "War On Women" Republican stereotype, guess what will become "pre-existing conditions" under Republicare?
- 1,916
- Letchworth
- mistersafeway
- 1,916
- Letchworth
- mistersafeway
Danoff
Premium
- 33,937
- Mile High City
The pre-existing condition problem is a real one, it's not something that can just be swept under the rug as some kind of "corporate greed".
Rape and domestic abuse is a pre-existing condition, just like any other kind of condition. Being shot, stabbed, blown up, whatever is also a pre-existing condition. So would injuries from a car accident. Waiting until you're in a car accident to get insurance means you can skip out on paying for insurance altogether - which obviously destroys the model of insurance.
So... what I said earlier.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
- 1,916
- Letchworth
- mistersafeway
Danoff
Premium
- 33,937
- Mile High City
No... you need health insurance...
Ok, fair enough, it's not inherently always a pre-existing condition. But if it results in medical treatment (including psychological treatment), that medical treatment makes it a pre-existing condition. So once again, it fits. There's nothing wrong with rape or domestic abuse being a pre-existing condition.
Last edited:
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
That's like saying you'd claim injuries from a car accident against the health insurance of the fault party and any vehicular damage against their car insurance? That's not how I thought it worked anywhere, let alone the US.
Danoff
Premium
- 33,937
- Mile High City
From your article:
from the linked article above:
If you're at fault, you need health insurance to cover your injuries. If the other party is at fault, you still go through your health insurance, but your health insurance may be reimbursed by their liability coverage.
http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/personal-injury/pay-medical-bills-after-accident.html
Last edited:
- 6,259
- Tecumseh, MI
- I_Fail_At_FPS
He was a dead man walking regardless. It was pretty clear that Trump wanted him gone with the Russia investigation, and Hillary would have ousted him over the E-Mail investigation if she was president. I'm just shocked that he wasn't fired sooner.
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/trump-fires-fbi-director-james-comey/520967216
More info in the link.
The same people who wanted Comey out over the Hillary investigation, are shocked and crying foul now.
Shocked I am not.
More info in the link.
But Trump never was under investigation... We're happy the Leader of the Clinton protection agency is gone.
The same people who wanted Comey out over the Hillary investigation, are shocked and crying foul now.
Shocked I am not.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
- 4,509
- SoCal
- GTP_MooCow
i LOL, so true, new seasons on 5/28, but i guess Trump just beat Netflix to it.
Where do you get your Fake News at ?? Trumps was going to be under investigation... He was under investigation indirectly through his associates...
"Leader of the Clinton protection agency" ??? Comey cost her the Presidency, he was certainly not protecting her or them... Why would you think that Hillary's supporters are shocked or cared that he's gone now ?
Why would you not be surprised that Comey is being ousted ?
You might want to think it through before speaking illogically...
What are you saying ?
Why would it be Fake Outrage ?
So what you are saying is that: If Clinton was the President and had fired Comey, then the lefty would NOT be outraged but be glad, but that would mean people on the right would be outraged right ?
In the current situation, Trump is the the POTUS, SO what possibly is there that Trump could benefit from firing him ? can you explain ? Why would a lefty be outraged at something that they would be happy Clinton would have done... Why would the right not be outraged here ?
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
In politics outrage is not a true emotional reaction to an event you find egregious or scanadalous, it's simply a tool in your political toolbox that you pull out whenever it's politically expedient to do so. Whatever outrage the Democrats have over this is the exact same outrage the Republicans would have had, had Hillary won and fired Comey. Had Comey stayed on and Trump was cleared of any wrongdoing with the Russian affair, the Democrats would be calling for his head. Had Comey stayed on under a Clinton administration the reaction would have been the same on the Republican side. Blah, blah, blah, outrage has zero meaning in politics.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,389
- Texas
Uh, pretty much. And the Right would be just as dumb for getting upset if Clinton fired Comey herself.
The Left are outraged because they're just mad Trump did it and some are like andrea above; they spew whatever dumb nonsense they want without looking at a letter above that says otherwise.
Neither side has a right to be upset over this firing because both sides called for Comey's head during the election. They both got what they wanted, and every sane person here said in the election thread that Comey's days would be numbered regardless of who won after the worst possible way of handling Clinton's investigation.
Edit* Here's a decent example. Sanders slammed Trump for firing Comey, believing it was to hush any Russian ties.
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...-firing-comey-in-order-to-kill-inquiries-into
Here's Sanders back in January believing Comey should resign for his conduct over the Hillary investigation.
http://www.businessinsider.com/bernie-sanders-fbi-james-comey-resign-2017-1
Sanders got what he wanted, just not the way he wanted it done.
Last edited:
- 5,588
- Dahlonega, GA
- ryzno
And like I'd/anyone would/should trust Comey's finding, after his Hillary investigation. He lied, flat out. As one of the Senators said last week during Comey's testimony in congress, How can you tell me no one committed a crime, when numerous unauthorized people have classified information? Riddle me that... I bet you didn't even know he testified last week did you? Things unfold themselves...
Just cause Comey is out doesn't mean the investigation is over. You sound like the people crying over the ACA, it still hasn't even gone through the Senate...
Where do you get your fake news? Read above... And let us not mention the rigged DNC... She lost it...
So they can cry the same, Trump avoided the Russia investigation, you just used. Even if she won, you know he was gonna be ousted just for opening the investigation.
Read above...
You can keep it simple and just say you think my view is dumb next time...
- 40,739
I absolutely love it when people say something so dumb and then something so cocky literally right after each other like this.
Obama was bawling Comey out before the election was even over, and you think people should be surprised he got canned a few months into the next administration? There was a period during the lame duck where people were wondering if Obama would even fire him himself, but you think he would have kept his job if Clinton had won after the Email circus? The only surprising thing is that Trump waited until someone else suggested it to him before doing it instead of having someone lined up from the day he took office.
Last edited:
