Congratulations to President Obama!

I leave the abortion talk to those that have been effected by it.
You are a compassionate, intelligent, and sexy man. :rose:


Who knows who proxyaccount is, and who cares. When he gets pregnant, he can make his own decision about that lump of cells in his womb. If he doesn't want to put women through that decision, he can get a vasectomy.

If he wants to bitch about the tax dollars, he can tell himself that he's giving HIS money to the war, because I don't want to give mine to the military.
 
You are a compassionate, intelligent, and sexy man. :rose:


Who knows who proxyaccount is, and who cares. When he gets pregnant, he can make his own decision about that lump of cells in his womb. If he doesn't want to put women through that decision, he can get a vasectomy.

If he wants to bitch about the tax dollars, he can tell himself that he's giving HIS money to the war, because I don't want to give mine to the military.

Thank you, my wife raised me well LOL
 
Did you not vote people into office and then expect them to scratch your back? (and to allow you to scapegoat on someone else)?
I don't vote for anyone to give me money or scratch my back. I simply want them to leave me alone and, if possible, to stop screwing up the country so my kids won't be obligated to some outrageous debt. Americans owe (via the national debt) approximately $51,516.73 per person. Per taxpayer (a significantly smaller number), it's far more than double that.

Really, I don't care if you zanies rant about these things. I don't mind watching you give yourselves coronaries while you sit in your LazyBoys and rant at the world.
LOL! I neither have a LazyBoy, nor do I rant at the world on any regular basis. (Hell, I don't even post on any regular basis.) This is more of an indulgence than anything. If you partisans drive the country into oblivion, I'll get along just fine, just like anyone else that is self-reliant. The idiocy of government tends to be more of an expensive inconvenience for me. X-(
 
If he wants to bitch about the tax dollars, he can tell himself that he's giving HIS money to the war, because I don't want to give mine to the military.
Interestingly enough, do you realize that we will have expended over 10 billion in Iraq and 111 billion in Afghanistan, in 2012 alone? (Not including the costs in personnel.) Why are we doing this? Is it really in our country's best interest to continue operations, including military training, security, and infrastructure in those countries? Wouldn't it have been better to put that money to use in our own country or not spend it at all? Once again, another point that the asses and dumbos agree on--namely that we continue to spend money in that region.
 
If you partisans drive the country into oblivion, (

If you'd actually read (and absorbed) this thread, you'd know that I'm not the partisan you assume. Try another word you consider a slam: liberal or even socialist would work on me (although democratic socialist would be nearer the mark). Neither one of them would make me think you a bit smarter and less ill-informed "out there," though. Which, again, is fine with me that you are (until the day you appear on my doorstep, all wild eyed, foaming at the mouth, and carrying that gun folks like you say you now have to go out and buy to protect 'Merica and your right to have other people pay for the services you get from our system).
 
Interestingly enough, do you realize that we will have expended over 10 billion in Iraq and 111 billion in Afghanistan, in 2012 alone? (Not including the costs in personnel.) Why are we doing this? Is it really in our country's best interest to continue operations, including military training, security, and infrastructure in those countries? Wouldn't it have been better to put that money to use in our own country or not spend it at all? Once again, another point that the asses and dumbos agree on--namely that we continue to spend money in that region.
No duh.

Look, there's no reason for you to be haranguing the pornmongers at AH. Take it to reddit, facebook, Ohio Star, NYT, wherever the news is top priority.
 
It's NOT my body, it's NOT baby. I shouldn't have a say.
But it is their money. They should have a say before having to pay for a product that they believe to go against their religious beliefs.

And as for "paying" for abortions, does this include in cases of rape, incest, and the health of the mother factor into it?
When it is a health issue, which includes psychological and physiological health, I believe that a woman's existing health insurance policy *should already* cover it! If her insurance company would cover a hysterectomy under the same policy, she shouldn't need an additional rider on the policy to pay for it! The requirement of an extra rider is just an insurance company's way of squeezing more money out of women, just like forcing every American to buy their products is their way of ensuring that they can make money off of every American, even if those individuals don't need or want their products.

Those hormone treatments are more expensive than the pills now readily available. Before we had insurance, my wife and I tried that, injections and pills. They didn't really worked, and caused a financial strain.
In most cases, doctors can prescribe the same pill, but in lower dosages. The alternative treatments should primarily be prescribed when the woman is at risk of blood clots (e.g. due to Factor V Leiden) or has other preexisting conditions that contraindicate usage of a COCP. That might be why your doctor prescribed the alternatives, first.
 
I don't vote for anyone to give me money or scratch my back. I simply want them to leave me alone and, if possible, to stop screwing up the country so my kids won't be obligated to some outrageous debt. Americans owe (via the national debt) approximately $51,516.73 per person. Per taxpayer (a significantly smaller number), it's far more than double that.


LOL! I neither have a LazyBoy, nor do I rant at the world on any regular basis. (Hell, I don't even post on any regular basis.) This is more of an indulgence than anything. If you partisans drive the country into oblivion, I'll get along just fine, just like anyone else that is self-reliant. The idiocy of government tends to be more of an expensive inconvenience for me. X-(

Your kids wont be stuck with the debt, cuz we'll be bankrupt soon enough when we cant pay the interest on the debt, and the interest is a large chunk of change. And you wont do just fine, cuz the government is gonna confiscate your stuff like the Bolsheviks did in 1920.
 
521819_10151296900670041_363358481_n.jpg


And again... congrats to this country. We made democracy happen -- as it should be, after all.
 
No duh.

Look, there's no reason for you to be haranguing the pornmongers at AH. Take it to reddit, facebook, Ohio Star, NYT, wherever the news is top priority.
So why don't you visit those sites to post your opinions on political or social issues instead of this site? The likely answer for both of us is that we're already here, is it not?
 
But it is their money. They should have a say before having to pay for a product that they believe to go against their religious beliefs.


When it is a health issue, which includes psychological and physiological health, I believe that a woman's existing health insurance policy *should already* cover it! If her insurance company would cover a hysterectomy under the same policy, she shouldn't need an additional rider on the policy to pay for it! The requirement of an extra rider is just an insurance company's way of squeezing more money out of women, just like forcing every American to buy their products is their way of ensuring that they can make money off of every American, even if those individuals don't need or want their products.


In most cases, doctors can prescribe the same pill, but in lower dosages. The alternative treatments should primarily be prescribed when the woman is at risk of blood clots (e.g. due to Factor V Leiden) or has other preexisting conditions that contraindicate usage of a COCP. That might be why your doctor prescribed the alternatives, first.

I think we shouldn't overpay for military items which the generals and admirals don't want.

And you do know that, if you have insurance already and like it, you do NOT have to change?
 
So why don't you visit those sites to post your opinions on political or social issues instead of this site? The likely answer for both of us is that we're already here, is it not?

That's what I've been doing all of this year.
 
Your kids wont be stuck with the debt, cuz we'll be bankrupt soon enough when we cant pay the interest on the debt, and the interest is a large chunk of change. And you wont do just fine, cuz the government is gonna confiscate your stuff like the Bolsheviks did in 1920.

Put the tin foil hat away
 
Your kids wont be stuck with the debt, cuz we'll be bankrupt soon enough when we cant pay the interest on the debt, and the interest is a large chunk of change. And you wont do just fine, cuz the government is gonna confiscate your stuff like the Bolsheviks did in 1920.
Eh, that's conspiracy theorist talk. Look, in Western nations where sovereign debt is already crippling the government, you're not seeing countries resort to that. They've raised taxes and cut benefits, but not suspended individual property rights.
 
Man, sir.

You really are from the bad side of town.

Your kids wont be stuck with the debt, cuz we'll be bankrupt soon enough when we cant pay the interest on the debt, and the interest is a large chunk of change. And you wont do just fine, cuz the government is gonna confiscate your stuff like the Bolsheviks did in 1920.
 
Oh, don't pay any attention to JBJ. He'd go to the opposite side if he knew he'd get the attention you just gave him. He'd be ecstatic if you actually tried to reason with his chosen pot stirrings.

What we missed on the AH this election cycle in contrast to earlier presidential elections (but they didn't miss on the GB) is that he continued his record of being totally wrong in all of his election prognostications. You can almost use him as a scientific control on this. :D
 
I was waiting for someone to come up with the tin foil hat in relation to the direction the thread has taken. :D

As with most post-election threads, it is warrented. I'm surprised Dick Morris and Karl Rove aren't selling them on QVC :D
 
As with most post-election threads, it is warrented. I'm surprised Dick Morris and Karl Rove aren't selling them on QVC :D

True, but (as I noted up front) I commented on this one because it didn't start up woowoo crazy like all of the ones on the GB did. It got around to it, though.
 
Sorry, but got to...

LC, like him or not the world breathed a sigh of relief when Obama was elected in 2008, it really did. And far from making us a laughingstock he restored respect for the US around the world. The political divisiveness (can you say Boehner, debt ceiling, filibuster?) has the rest of the world shaking its head, but not Obama. Also, Obama has also been far more hawkish than expected...drones and stuff...just quiet about it.
 
I think we shouldn't overpay for military items which the generals and admirals don't want.
Brass wants a lot of things that we can't afford. However, the average Soldier/Sailor/Marine/Airman needs things that we can afford. The most critical factor in our nation's military is the investment in equipping and training our personnel in areas essential their duties and enhancing their ability to survive and execute their missions. We don't need ten different pieces of equipment to do the same job or a system that doesn't have a real-world mission that justifies its cost. The individual services don't need a unique weapon or personal equipment if there's one that already does the job or can be cost-effectively modified to do the job. The services need to share resources, not just on the field, but in research, development, and procurement. To a good degree, this is already happening, but there are still sacred cows that the services invest in.

And you do know that, if you have insurance already and like it, you do NOT have to change?
If you have a so-called "Cadillac insurance plan", you will be taxed for it, creating a de-facto cap that will deprive many Americans of essential benefits. Many choose the best plan that they can afford and that meets their needs. By taxing them for choosing a high-value plan, it effectively reduces their ability to afford those plans! It's like telling everyone to buy a sub-compact car and placing an additional tax on them if they buy a mini-van. The result will be that many will buy a sub-compact, even if they need a mini-van, and those that do buy a mini-van will have to sacrifice something else in their family budget.

Further, by setting such rigid standards on insurance policies, individuals that prefer far less expensive, low-premium, high co-pay, and/or limited benefit policies will not be able to keep those keep them because the policy will no longer be offered. Similarly, companies that cannot afford to conform might be better off by *not providing insurance* and paying the per employee penalty. Thus, by de facto control of what is offered or affordable, the federal law can deprive individuals of the plans that they were previously satisfied with and taxpayers will be on the hook for the difference that's put on the nation's already heavily-charged credit card.

All of this funnels Americans into policies that render high profits per individual. What's next? Should everyone be forced to buy whole life insurance policies? Should everyone be forced to become an organ donor? Where are the limits, now?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top