News of the day

Spot on with that, it just mucks up the debate, it's about insurance, but insurance is how you get care.

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Epignosis wrote: The law does not give anyone affordable health care.  It gives people "affordable" health insurance.  Not the same thing. If this law goes into full effect, I predict we will see the actual cost of health care (doctor's fees, hospital costs, etc.) increase.  I also predict insurance premiums and deductibles will increase-insurance companies have to make a profit. You're not thinking like a Democrat here.

This is why I support single payer health insurance.

Derp Derp Derp People Who Say They\'re Moving To Canada Because Of ObamaCare Derp Derp Derp Derp

akamaisondufromage wrote: Murdoch says he would be reluctant to invest in Britain again!  Well thanks a bundle now f**k Off and don't come back again!  You lovely man you

Edited by Slartibartfast - June 28 2012 at 13:31

Slarti and others, you probably have the answer to this probably stupid question. Honestly, I haven't read the entire Obamacare law so my girlfriend was asking me:

If someone doesn't have insurance, one is fined. So people who make little money a year and can't afford, how will they pay?

Now another question, very similar: let's have one of the millions of Americans with low, though not Medicaid-low, incomes. They can't afford insurance. They are heavily fined. Are they getting insurance after all by the government, even if they are fined? Because if not, this poor person is being screwed over twice: not only does he have no insurance, and of top of that they're taking up to 700$ from him. Explain how this persn benefits from the new law. Honestly, Imm not being sarcastic, I haven't read the law. Maybe I don't know much?

^Ok. That was puzzling. Thanks. 

While the health care ruling is indeed horrible, we should be happy that they got the Stolen Valor Act right/ See my op-ed on the subject:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/28/united-states-v-alvarez-a-win-for-first-amendment/


Edited by thellama73 - July 01 2012 at 10:29

Epignosis wrote: thellama73 wrote: While the health care ruling is indeed horrible, we should be happy that they got the Stolen Valor Act right/ See my op-ed on the subject: http://dailycaller.com/2012/06/28/united-states-v-alvarez-a-win-for-first-amendment/ I was going to read it, but then I got sidetracked.

The article is titled "Two women busted for 'exposing their sexual organs' on golf course". But when I read it, all it said was they lifted their shirts up. So where does the 'sexual organs' part come in?

Epignosis wrote: By the way Logan, you ever respond to the people who comment on your article?  There's some pretty pissed folks on there.

Almost never. I'm not interested in arguing with idiots on the internet unless they are also prog fans.

I don't mean anything bad by your article, but I enjoyed the comments more. I love people who think that permission = promotion. 

thellama73 wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: I don't mean anything bad by your article, but I enjoyed the comments more. I love people who think that permission = promotion.  I was particularly entertained by the unintelligible COWBOYCOP. I wonder whether he is an enforcer of cowboy law or a regular cop who just happens to be a cowboy as well.

"I hear tell people were making jokes about me."

 

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Drudge headline says: Proof of God Particle Found Ugh I hate science reporting. There's no proof. There's no God particle yet.

The headline now reads "Evidence of God Particle Found".

Yahoo's headline on the same topic is "Scientists Say Proof of God Particle Found".  (We really need a facepalm emoticon).