Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(YouTube)   Video of "Mean" Jean Schmidt's (R-OH) thoughtful reaction when she erroneously learned that the individual mandate had been struck down thus denying millions of people affordable health care   (youtube.com) divider line 250
    More: Sad, healthcare reform, individual mandate  
•       •       •

8041 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Jun 2012 at 4:32 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



250 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-06-29 01:24:18 PM  
These people are farking insane.
 
2012-06-29 01:27:14 PM  
"OH GOOD! THE POOR ARE STILL FARKED!"
 
2012-06-29 01:27:54 PM  
That video really needs a before and after.
 
2012-06-29 01:28:54 PM  
HA-HA!!!
 
2012-06-29 01:30:48 PM  
Is that her voice at the end with "tax? They can't make it a tax, congress has to make it a tax!", or someone else?
 
2012-06-29 01:39:34 PM  
On one hand, an argument could be made for a knowledgeable legal scholar's fear that the court would continue its trend of interpreting the Commerce Clause so broadly it would put Octomom's vagina to shame.

On the other hand, something tells me the crazy shrieking lady isn't well-versed in constitutional law.
 
2012-06-29 01:45:52 PM  
I used to think that republicans do the things they do because they're just charlatans pandering to a pack of deranged sociopaths (ie, "their base").

Now, with this display of sadistic glee over the idea of condemning millions of men, women, and children to an agonizing, uninsured death, I see that they're not just mere panderers. They really ARE a gang of vile monsters who delight in the suffering of Humanity and plot for it's destruction.
 
2012-06-29 01:47:34 PM  
Nice show of humanity there, lady.
 
2012-06-29 01:56:44 PM  
Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the kind of person who represents the Republican party. Remember, vote Republican.
 
2012-06-29 02:00:15 PM  

TV's Vinnie: I used to think that republicans do the things they do because they're just charlatans pandering to a pack of deranged sociopaths (ie, "their base").

Now, with this display of sadistic glee over the idea of condemning millions of men, women, and children to an agonizing, uninsured death, I see that they're not just mere panderers. They really ARE a gang of vile monsters who delight in the suffering of Humanity and plot for it's destruction.


Been thinking about thinking about this. It's not that they don't care about the American people it's that American politics are no longer about governing the country. Politics has become basically a sporting event. The only thing that matters is if your side wins or loses. There are no repercussions. There is no thinking about "is this good or bad for the country". It's all wins and loses and if you win you get reelected and if you lose you might not. Plain and simple.

This is why you see the insane hyperbole take the place of rational discourse. Sad thing is that it's the citizens who lose no matter what.
 
2012-06-29 02:24:28 PM  

Blues_X: "OH GOOD! THE POOR ARE STILL FARKED!"


Thank God.
 
2012-06-29 02:24:50 PM  
Isn't this the same lady who called a disabled veteran a coward on the floor of the House?
 
2012-06-29 02:31:59 PM  

Aarontology: Isn't this the same lady who called a disabled veteran a coward on the floor of the House?


And serves a constituency whose median household income is $46,813, so you know, things are just fine for them.
 
2012-06-29 02:49:08 PM  

Shostie: That video really needs a before and after.


Yeah, I want the follow-up of her laying on the ground throwing a temper tantrum and crying like a little b*tch.
 
2012-06-29 02:57:56 PM  
"YES! THANK GOD! THANK GOD THAT KIDS WILL ONCE AGAIN BE DENIED INSURANCE FOR PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS! THANK YOU, JESUS!"

She's a horrible, horrible human being.
 
2012-06-29 03:03:35 PM  
Is that what it sounds like when a 60 year old conservative woman has an orgasm?
 
2012-06-29 03:07:59 PM  

Shostie: That video really needs a before and after.


Yeah, I'm not getting nearly enough schadenfreude just from this. I think you can hear someone better informed start to argue with her about it. Is that her shouting "CONGRESS HAS TO MAKE IT A TAX!" No, I need to see her face.
 
2012-06-29 03:10:35 PM  
Healthcare just ain't as sweet if poor people have it too. EVERYONE knows that.
 
2012-06-29 03:12:30 PM  

jchic: TV's Vinnie: I used to think that republicans do the things they do because they're just charlatans pandering to a pack of deranged sociopaths (ie, "their base").

Now, with this display of sadistic glee over the idea of condemning millions of men, women, and children to an agonizing, uninsured death, I see that they're not just mere panderers. They really ARE a gang of vile monsters who delight in the suffering of Humanity and plot for it's destruction.

Been thinking about thinking about this. It's not that they don't care about the American people it's that American politics are no longer about governing the country. Politics has become basically a sporting event. The only thing that matters is if your side wins or loses. There are no repercussions. There is no thinking about "is this good or bad for the country". It's all wins and loses and if you win you get reelected and if you lose you might not. Plain and simple.

This is why you see the insane hyperbole take the place of rational discourse. Sad thing is that it's the citizens who lose no matter what.


Bullshiat. This is just a weasel-word word salad to say 'both sides are bad.' Bullshiat.
 
2012-06-29 03:15:58 PM  

vernonFL: Is that what it sounds like when a 60 year old conservative woman has an orgasm?


It's never happened before, so it's tough to say.
 
2012-06-29 03:16:41 PM  

robsul82: Healthcare just ain't as sweet if poor people have it too. EVERYONE knows that.


When I can take my kids to the doctor and have them looked after, it warms my heart and makes me feel secure as a parent. When I know, my neighbour who was laid off can do the same thing for his children it sickens and disgusts me because it isn't fair.
 
2012-06-29 03:17:55 PM  

Diogenes: vernonFL: Is that what it sounds like when a 60 year old conservative woman has an orgasm?

It's never happened before, so it's tough to say.


Someone has just risen to the top of my list of people in the GOP that I absolutely hate.
 
2012-06-29 03:43:11 PM  

GAT_00: Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the kind of person who represents the Republican party. Remember, vote Republican.


i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-29 03:46:11 PM  

mrshowrules: Diogenes: vernonFL: Is that what it sounds like when a 60 year old conservative woman has an orgasm?

It's never happened before, so it's tough to say.

Someone has just risen to the top of my list of people in the GOP that I absolutely hate.


The top of my list is pretty crowded.
 
2012-06-29 04:01:27 PM  

unyon: Is that her voice at the end with "tax? They can't make it a tax, congress has to make it a tax!", or someone else?


if we ever needed any additional proof that she is unqualified to hold public office, we just got it.
 
2012-06-29 04:08:14 PM  
I never would have expected a "conservative" to be so upset by the implementation of a Republican/Heritage Foundation plan.
 
2012-06-29 04:14:02 PM  
Pretty sure she was defeated in the GOP primary by a Tea Bagger.
 
2012-06-29 04:16:20 PM  
I wish I was poor enough to afford health care.
 
2012-06-29 04:34:23 PM  
I just sent this to her official e-mail:

Link
 
2012-06-29 04:34:43 PM  
I would call Republicans horrible, despicable, loathsome, and wretched human beings but I'm too much a gentleman to besmirch the dignity of horrible, despicable, loathsome, and wretched human beings.
 
2012-06-29 04:39:24 PM  
Why does she hate Romneycare so much?
 
2012-06-29 04:39:54 PM  

PreMortem: Pretty sure she was defeated in the GOP primary by a Tea Bagger.


The question is: was she primaried by a teabag or teabagged in the primary?
 
2012-06-29 04:40:36 PM  

PreMortem: Pretty sure she was defeated in the GOP primary by a Tea Bagger.



Good to know she isn't extreme enough for Ohio Republicans.
 
2012-06-29 04:42:19 PM  
And if it was Bush or Romney's in the exact same situation, she'd be acting the complete opposite. It's all politics and personal hate to these jerks.
 
2012-06-29 04:43:26 PM  

DarkJohnson: I wish I was poor enough to afford health care.


Those lucky poor people...they get all the breaks!
 
2012-06-29 04:43:57 PM  
God I really want to see the rest of that reaction
 
2012-06-29 04:43:58 PM  
Remember this thread when people complained about the lack of decorum by the director of the DNC? I wonder if they're going to condemn this as well.
 
2012-06-29 04:44:00 PM  

FishyFred: Shostie: That video really needs a before and after.

Yeah, I'm not getting nearly enough schadenfreude just from this. I think you can hear someone better informed start to argue with her about it. Is that her shouting "CONGRESS HAS TO MAKE IT A TAX!" No, I need to see her face.


I need to see the frothy spittle splash across her glasses.


/ Might just be me...
 
2012-06-29 04:45:06 PM  

TofuTheAlmighty: I would call Republicans horrible, despicable, loathsome, and wretched human beings but I'm too much a gentleman to besmirch the dignity of horrible, despicable, loathsome, and wretched human beings.


Well said.
 
2012-06-29 04:46:27 PM  

PreMortem: Pretty sure she was defeated in the GOP primary by a Tea Bagger.


Yes. Sadly she isn't right wing enough for her district. My district. Ugh.
 
2012-06-29 04:46:28 PM  
To console herself after she found out the truth, she went to the local childrens hospital and pulled the IVs out of poor kids arms. That brought a smile to her face.
 
2012-06-29 04:46:50 PM  
When the actual result was announced a few short minutes later, I imagine her butthurt was so intense that her white dress had a red stain on the back.
 
2012-06-29 04:48:03 PM  

propasaurus: jchic: TV's Vinnie: I used to think that republicans do the things they do because they're just charlatans pandering to a pack of deranged sociopaths (ie, "their base").

Now, with this display of sadistic glee over the idea of condemning millions of men, women, and children to an agonizing, uninsured death, I see that they're not just mere panderers. They really ARE a gang of vile monsters who delight in the suffering of Humanity and plot for it's destruction.

Been thinking about thinking about this. It's not that they don't care about the American people it's that American politics are no longer about governing the country. Politics has become basically a sporting event. The only thing that matters is if your side wins or loses. There are no repercussions. There is no thinking about "is this good or bad for the country". It's all wins and loses and if you win you get reelected and if you lose you might not. Plain and simple.

This is why you see the insane hyperbole take the place of rational discourse. Sad thing is that it's the citizens who lose no matter what.

Bullshiat. This is just a weasel-word word salad to say 'both sides are bad.' Bullshiat.


Back when I blogged, I said the same thing in 2008. Legislation doesn't get written or passed because it's good; it's just a panderfest. I'd say that the right is worse, but voting for the least shiatty option gets old fast.

/I am Jack's enthusiasm gap
 
2012-06-29 04:48:10 PM  
That was just disturbing to watch.

I like to joke a lot when discussing politics, but this just makes me sad. So much hate. WTF, people?
 
2012-06-29 04:48:16 PM  

jchic: TV's Vinnie: I used to think that republicans do the things they do because they're just charlatans pandering to a pack of deranged sociopaths (ie, "their base").

Now, with this display of sadistic glee over the idea of condemning millions of men, women, and children to an agonizing, uninsured death, I see that they're not just mere panderers. They really ARE a gang of vile monsters who delight in the suffering of Humanity and plot for it's destruction.

Been thinking about thinking about this. It's not that they don't care about the American people it's that American politics are no longer about governing the country. Politics has become basically a sporting event. The only thing that matters is if your side wins or loses. There are no repercussions. There is no thinking about "is this good or bad for the country". It's all wins and loses and if you win you get reelected and if you lose you might not. Plain and simple.

This is why you see the insane hyperbole take the place of rational discourse. Sad thing is that it's the citizens who lose no matter what.


Perhaps...but the insane hyperbole is only happening on one side. I think we all know which side that is.
 
2012-06-29 04:48:18 PM  
It's a damn shame she lost her primary. That's the type of composure and wisdom the GOP needs to reclaim some of its lost credibility.
 
2012-06-29 04:48:46 PM  

unyon: Is that her voice at the end with "tax? They can't make it a tax, congress has to make it a tax!", or someone else?


I liked that part, too. And Congress did make it a tax, lady. They just didn't use the right word.
 
2012-06-29 04:49:53 PM  
Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.
 
2012-06-29 04:49:58 PM  

flixter: PreMortem: Pretty sure she was defeated in the GOP primary by a Tea Bagger.

Yes. Sadly she isn't right wing enough for her district. My district. Ugh.


Holy fark that is some hard-core teabaggery there. Does your district have a higher than average percentage of old people or is it just a gas leak?
 
2012-06-29 04:50:00 PM  
A few Fark Cons had that same reaction in the live thread.

They went missing after that.

One guy started threatening people.
 
2012-06-29 04:50:41 PM  
Well, I guess we know what campaign ads against her are going to look like.
 
2012-06-29 04:51:59 PM  

DarkJohnson: I wish I was poor enough to afford health care.


static.seekingalpha.com
 
2012-06-29 04:52:01 PM  
Press release later that day:

"I'm disappointed by the Supreme Court ruling. Two years ago, when the Democrats who then controlled the House passed the so-called Affordable Care Act, they were adamant that it wasn't a tax. President Obama was adamant that it wasn't a tax. Now, the Supreme Court says it's a tax. Regardless of how it's labeled, the law should be repealed."
 
2012-06-29 04:52:38 PM  

cchris_39: I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care


Uh, how about NO.

There is a difference between getting care and using the ER as your last resort because you don't have insurance. I know it's hard for Republicans to understand. But if you are ever unfortunate enough to get cancer then go to the ER and pretend you don't have insurance and see how much treatment you get.
 
2012-06-29 04:53:01 PM  
Portrait, it's the new landscape.
 
2012-06-29 04:53:19 PM  

Pincy: flixter: PreMortem: Pretty sure she was defeated in the GOP primary by a Tea Bagger.

Yes. Sadly she isn't right wing enough for her district. My district. Ugh.

Holy fark that is some hard-core teabaggery there. Does your district have a higher than average percentage of old people or is it just a gas leak?


She has the east side of Cincinnati and then like 100 square miles of back wood appalachia hill people
 
2012-06-29 04:55:03 PM  
is she crying or cheering? Either way, that's one weird beeotch
 
2012-06-29 04:55:32 PM  
what's funny about subby's ridiculous take on this is striking down the individual mandate wasn't going to cost anyone their healthcare that got provided it for the first time through the ACA.

the mandate part wasn't necessary for the plan to survive. it was necessary to pad the insurance companies bottom line.
insurance companies just would have raised rates on current customers more to make up for the costs associated with prex folks and other additions that are now covered instead of relying on massive profits from the young and healthy that want no part of the overpriced dogshiat the insurance companies are selling.

what actually happened is the court ruled the federal government can't coerce the states into raising medicaid eligibility standards from the poverty limit ($18k or so for a family of 4) to $29k for a family of 4. a f*cking enormous amount of people without much money to speak of were going to be insured this way.

this is now dead. that's what the SCOTUS struck. many states won't expand medicaid. there are probably only half a dozen states right now that aren't facing severe budget problems at this moment.

this was literally the worst outcome imaginable, and it is telling that you are cheering for it. the people who were least able to afford it won't be insured. you're cheering for a ridiculous outcome subby. HCA's stock has gone up 20% in two days, people are going to be forced to become profit centers for the insurance companies, the rich are getting richer and the poor got f*cked again.
 
2012-06-29 04:55:38 PM  

skullkrusher: is she crying or cheering? Either way, that's one weird beeotch


Probably one, then the other.
 
2012-06-29 04:55:51 PM  

mrshowrules: Diogenes: vernonFL: Is that what it sounds like when a 60 year old conservative woman has an orgasm?

It's never happened before, so it's tough to say.

Someone has just risen to the top of my list of people in the GOP that I absolutely hate.


Here's mine, what I believe are the worst of the worst:

upload.wikimedia.orgupload.wikimedia.org
upload.wikimedia.orgupload.wikimedia.org

Now with bonus "mean" Jean Schmidt.
 
2012-06-29 04:56:01 PM  

Pincy: Holy fark that is some hard-core teabaggery there. Does your district have a higher than average percentage of old people or is it just a gas leak?


She is a part of the majority.
 
2012-06-29 04:56:19 PM  

El Morro: That was just disturbing to watch.

I like to joke a lot when discussing politics, but this just makes me sad. So much hate. WTF, people?


Well, it can't be because he's black. That much is certain.
 
2012-06-29 04:58:17 PM  
That's what I looked like when the Cardinals won the World Series last year.

The fact she acted like that about something like health care reforms shows the sports team mentality permeating throughout politics in this country.
 
2012-06-29 04:59:30 PM  
again "the individual mandate had been struck down thus denying millions of people affordable health care" is bullshiat. that never would have happened. what actually happened is the medicaid mandate was stuck down, denying millions of low income people healthcare at all.

but you go on cheering subby, because obama said he won and the mandate for insurance company profits was actually the important bit.
 
2012-06-29 05:00:40 PM  

cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.


You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."
 
2012-06-29 05:02:40 PM  

Quasar: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."


I keep asking these retards to walk into an emergency room and ask for a prostate exam or cholesterol check and see how far they get.

People claiming the ER represents free health care are an extra special brand of stupid.
 
2012-06-29 05:04:27 PM  

qorkfiend: skullkrusher: is she crying or cheering? Either way, that's one weird beeotch

Probably one, then the other.


then she blamed it on her mother-in-law
 
2012-06-29 05:05:54 PM  

DeltaPunch: mrshowrules: Diogenes: vernonFL: Is that what it sounds like when a 60 year old conservative woman has an orgasm?

It's never happened before, so it's tough to say.

Someone has just risen to the top of my list of people in the GOP that I absolutely hate.

Here's mine, what I believe are the worst of the worst:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 200x301][upload.wikimedia.org image 220x331]
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x269][upload.wikimedia.org image 200x250]

Now with bonus "mean" Jean Schmidt.


What? No Steve King?
 
2012-06-29 05:06:06 PM  

Quasar: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."


you heard it here folks,
forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while) instead of the catastrophic plan that is cheap and I like because it will save me from having to file for bankruptcy if something unexpected happens is actually providing me affordable healthcare.
oh, and the fact that medicaid won't be expanding very much so millions of low income folks won't be insured at all is just something to be ignored.
 
2012-06-29 05:07:29 PM  

GAT_00: Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the kind of person who represents the Republican party. Remember, vote Republican.


That was a pretty amateurish display. THIS is how the pros do it.
 
2012-06-29 05:08:26 PM  

Quasar: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."


Plenty of folks don't think about health care until they're on the floor gasping with chest pains. Typically, they're the same folks who figure they don't need health insurance because "they'll never use it."
 
2012-06-29 05:10:19 PM  

soy_bomb: Pincy: Holy fark that is some hard-core teabaggery there. Does your district have a higher than average percentage of old people or is it just a gas leak?

She is a part of the majority.


Depends on what poll you're looking at. Gallup has it split
 
2012-06-29 05:11:51 PM  

robsul82: Healthcare just ain't as sweet if poor people have it too. EVERYONE knows that.


What we need to do is invent some alternative that is as important as health care, and is something only the super rich can possibly afford. Maybe pay off a bunch of doctors to start telling their rich patients that humanity is evolving to a higher plane of existence, ascending to a higher state of mental being, and they can get in on it if they go through many expensive, complicated procedures. Feed them a bunch of vitamins and placebos and make them do a bunch of yoga and meditation or something. Every 6 months do some blood work that shows a marked increase in the midichlorians or whatever. No one ever actually ascends of course, but while experts believe that the human species must still evolve through several more generations before ascension can be obtained on a living host, they're quite certain that at the moment of death, those who have endured the rigors of these procedures will almost certainly ascend.

The only real danger I guess is that it might turn into a religion, or Scientology sues it out of existence, but you get some good writers on this I think you could make a go of it.
 
2012-06-29 05:12:08 PM  

Rann Xerox: DeltaPunch: mrshowrules: Diogenes: vernonFL: Is that what it sounds like when a 60 year old conservative woman has an orgasm?

It's never happened before, so it's tough to say.

Someone has just risen to the top of my list of people in the GOP that I absolutely hate.

Here's mine, what I believe are the worst of the worst:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 200x301][upload.wikimedia.org image 220x331]
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x269][upload.wikimedia.org image 200x250]

Now with bonus "mean" Jean Schmidt.

What? No Steve King?


add Cantor and Lamar Smith
 
2012-06-29 05:12:12 PM  

relcec: Quasar: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."

you heard it here folks,
forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while) instead of the catastrophic plan that is cheap and I like because it will save me from having to file for bankruptcy if something unexpected happens is actually providing me affordable healthcare.
oh, and the fact that medicaid won't be expanding very much so millions of low income folks won't be insured at all is just something to be ignored.


You're not being forced to buy it. You can not buy it if you don't want. The tax is likely cheaper than your catastrophic plan, so you can make that choice if you like.
 
2012-06-29 05:12:18 PM  
Yes! Aetna can deny cancer kids coverage! Yes! Oh God Yes! Oh my god Yes! Deny my preexisting condition! Yes! Charge me double for my ovaries! Yes!

What a sick little woman.
 
2012-06-29 05:14:23 PM  
This is a real setback to the eliminate Medicare, Medicaid, and social security timetable.
 
2012-06-29 05:15:10 PM  
The other nice aspect to the news being muddled when it happened is that liberals can now rightly brutalize conservatives when conservatives falsely claim liberals are gloating without class and they would "never" have done that.
 
2012-06-29 05:15:22 PM  
 
2012-06-29 05:17:08 PM  

soy_bomb: Pincy: Holy fark that is some hard-core teabaggery there. Does your district have a higher than average percentage of old people or is it just a gas leak?

She is a part of the majority.


i prefer to think of her as a walking margin of error.
 
2012-06-29 05:17:10 PM  
Didn't Boehner say something to the effect of "do not spike the ball" to these asshats?

Stay classy, GOP
 
2012-06-29 05:17:14 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: soy_bomb: Pincy: Holy fark that is some hard-core teabaggery there. Does your district have a higher than average percentage of old people or is it just a gas leak?

She is a part of the majority.

Depends on what poll you're looking at. Gallup has it split


With independents narrowly in favor, and some portion of democrats wishing they overturned so the single payer fairy could give us all free colonoscopies. People marginally like this law and the decision. This is bad news...for Obama.
 
2012-06-29 05:18:54 PM  

Glenford: Remember this thread when people complained about the lack of decorum by the director of the DNC? I wonder if they're going to condemn this as well.


Of course not, they are hypocrites who especially revere those who revel in the suffering of others.
 
2012-06-29 05:20:37 PM  

ps69: Yes! Aetna can deny cancer kids coverage! Yes! Oh God Yes! Oh my god Yes! Deny my preexisting condition! Yes! Charge me double for my ovaries! Yes!

What a sick little woman.


Are you really going to argue that the lives of you and some random kid are more important that corporate profits? Troll.
 
2012-06-29 05:23:06 PM  
She's such a tw@t, it's well worth hacking the video system at her next campaign appearance and feeding this in with a giant "FAIL" at the end.
 
2012-06-29 05:24:25 PM  
"farking over the poor and sick is so awesome!!!"
 
2012-06-29 05:26:50 PM  

relcec: forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while)


I wonder; do statements like these represent an inability to rationally evaluate health insurance specifically, or are they indicative of a failure to comprehend the more general concept of expected utility altogether?
 
2012-06-29 05:28:16 PM  

Biological Ali: relcec: forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while)

I wonder; do statements like these represent an inability to rationally evaluate health insurance specifically, or are they indicative of a failure to comprehend the more general concept of expected utility altogether?


These are the same people who think HSA's are a good idea.
 
2012-06-29 05:29:36 PM  

TV's Vinnie: I used to think that republicans do the things they do because they're just charlatans pandering to a pack of deranged sociopaths (ie, "their base").

Now, with this display of sadistic glee over the idea of condemning millions of men, women, and children to an agonizing, uninsured death, I see that they're not just mere panderers. They really ARE a gang of vile monsters who delight in the suffering of Humanity and plot for it's destruction.


So, you mean they look at Mexican politicians and think "We can do that".
 
2012-06-29 05:29:49 PM  

Rent Party: relcec: Quasar: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."

you heard it here folks,
forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while) instead of the catastrophic plan that is cheap and I like because it will save me from having to file for bankruptcy if something unexpected happens is actually providing me affordable healthcare.
oh, and the fact that medicaid won't be expanding very much so millions of low income folks won't be insured at all is just something to be ignored.

You're not being forced to buy it. You can not buy it if you don't want. The tax is likely cheaper than your catastrophic plan, so you can make that choice if you like.


are you sure that insurance companies aren't prohibited by congress from selling the product at all to those over 30?
everywhere I've read about it has been described as a prohibition on the insurance companies from even selling it to me.
I am forced to an overpriced, unwanted product, because congress won't allow me to buy the one I want, because frankly that just doesn't create enough of profit for the insurance companies.

so I can choose from opening myself up to the probability of a medical bankruptcy if I develop a mild condition or have an accident and pay a nice extra tax for the trouble, or I can choose the ridiculously overpriced product that congress has limited me to and that I won't have an easy time affording.

yes, the mandate was truly about making healthcare affordable. I see it clearly now.
oh, and please don't look behind the curtain at the millions of low income families that aren't insured at all.
 
2012-06-29 05:30:51 PM  

Biological Ali: relcec: forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while)

I wonder; do statements like these represent an inability to rationally evaluate health insurance specifically, or are they indicative of a failure to comprehend the more general concept of expected utility altogether?


I'm thinking "a childhood of ingesting lead paint chips".
 
2012-06-29 05:32:01 PM  

relcec: oh, and please don't look behind the curtain at the millions of low income families that aren't insured at all.


the bill has subsidies in it
 
2012-06-29 05:34:59 PM  
So would this be considered "spiking the football"?
 
2012-06-29 05:36:10 PM  

skullkrusher: relcec: oh, and please don't look behind the curtain at the millions of low income families that aren't insured at all.

the bill has subsidies in it


Everyone knows the Devil put those there to test our faith.

Just like dinosaur bones.
 
2012-06-29 05:36:53 PM  

skullkrusher: relcec: oh, and please don't look behind the curtain at the millions of low income families that aren't insured at all.

the bill has subsidies in it


Why waste your breath?
 
2012-06-29 05:37:11 PM  

relcec: Quasar: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."

you heard it here folks,
forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while) instead of the catastrophic plan that is cheap and I like because it will save me from having to file for bankruptcy if something unexpected happens is actually providing me affordable healthcare.
oh, and the fact that medicaid won't be expanding very much so millions of low income folks won't be insured at all is just something to be ignored.


How dare you be a financially responsible person and use insurance for the purpose it was designed!! Don't you know, insurance is supposed to cover ALLLL your healthcare costs....and at a price far less than you would pay out of pocket for routine things?
 
2012-06-29 05:37:17 PM  
You know, I usually reserve the following for people who deserve it. I think she deserves it for cheering for the repeal of a law that will actually farking help people.

OH MY farkING GOD WHAT A GODDAMNED STUPID MOTHERfarkING coont WHORE MOTHERfarkING coont WHORE biatch

/yeah, she got coont whore biatch two times
//coont whore biatch
 
2012-06-29 05:40:38 PM  

relcec: this was literally the worst outcome imaginable, and it is telling that you are cheering for it.


img.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-29 05:42:24 PM  
Under the Tenure heading on her wikipedia entry mentioning sponsored bills:
- to provide ultrasounds to pregnant mothers (H.R. 216)
- to require women having abortions be "fully informed regarding the pain experienced by their unborn child" (H.R. 356)
- to ban human cloning (H.R. 1357)
- the "District of Columbia Personal Protection Act", which would repeal District of Columbia law forbidding residents from owning guns (H.R. 1288)


Under the same heading, subsection regarding her views on Abortion:

"Schmidt is strongly pro-life. When she launched her candidacy, she was president of the Right-to-Life of Greater Cincinnati.[57] At the Chatfield College debate, Schmidt said Roe v. Wade was "a flawed law made by activist judges" and would "love to see" it reversed.[58] Schmidt mailed literature to voters with an endorsement from Paula Westwood, executive director of the Cincinnati right-to-life:
Jean's legislative experience is invaluable to Right to Life of Greater Cincinnati's efforts and goals for the coming years. But more importantly, she has a tenacious devotion to the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death* already demonstrated in her political and private life."

(* - presumably caused by being unable to afford a simple doctor's visit)

So as long as you're a fetus, or are off killing people she thinks you deserve every respect and advantage. Otherwise, she's excited when you are denied access to affordable health coverage.

/Conservative hypocrite? Color me shocked.
 
2012-06-29 05:42:31 PM  

shamanwest: You know, I usually reserve the following for people who deserve it. I think she deserves it for cheering for the repeal of a law that will actually farking help people.

OH MY farkING GOD WHAT A GODDAMNED STUPID MOTHERfarkING coont WHORE MOTHERfarkING coont WHORE biatch

/yeah, she got coont whore biatch two times
//coont whore biatch


You know, Fark. If you're going to filter curse words, fine. You could at least have the filters match caps use.

/gawd!
 
2012-06-29 05:43:57 PM  

relcec: Rent Party: relcec: Quasar: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."

you heard it here folks,
forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while) instead of the catastrophic plan that is cheap and I like because it will save me from having to file for bankruptcy if something unexpected happens is actually providing me affordable healthcare.
oh, and the fact that medicaid won't be expanding very much so millions of low income folks won't be insured at all is just something to be ignored.

You're not being forced to buy it. You can not buy it if you don't want. The tax is likely cheaper than your catastrophic plan, so you can make that choice if you like.

are you sure that insurance companies aren't prohibited by congress from selling the product at all to those over 30?
everywhere I've read about it has been described as a prohibition on the insurance companies from even selling it to me.
I am forced to an overpriced, unwanted product, because congress won't allow me to buy the one I want, because frankly that just doesn't create enough of profit for the insurance companies.

so I can choose from opening myself up to the probability of a medical bankruptcy if I develop a mild condition or have an accident and pay a nice extra tax for the trouble, or I can choose the ridiculously overpriced product that congress has limited me to and that I won't have an easy time affording.

yes, the mandate was truly about making healthcare affordable. I see it clearly now.
oh, and please don't look behind the curtain at the millions of low income families that aren't insured at all.


Or you could choose to kill yourself now, preemptively, and we all win.
 
2012-06-29 05:44:31 PM  

shamanwest: You know, Fark. If you're going to filter curse words, fine. You could at least have the filters match caps use.


it's like a sine wave of angry. revel in it.
 
2012-06-29 05:45:32 PM  

Epoch_Zero: - to require women having abortions be "fully informed regarding the pain experienced by their unborn child" (H.R. 356)


You know, it's stupid BS laws like that in which I were a woman who had to go though that, I'd sit through all of that "information" and then respond by "huh, that sounds dandy. Suck the motherfarker out."

Because once that child is born, the GOP couldn't give a shiat what happens to it unless it adhires to its dogma.
 
2012-06-29 05:46:34 PM  

DeltaPunch: mrshowrules: Diogenes: vernonFL: Is that what it sounds like when a 60 year old conservative woman has an orgasm?

It's never happened before, so it's tough to say.

Someone has just risen to the top of my list of people in the GOP that I absolutely hate.

Here's mine, what I believe are the worst of the worst:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 200x301][upload.wikimedia.org image 220x331]
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x269][upload.wikimedia.org image 200x250]

Now with bonus "mean" Jean Schmidt.


Jesus shiat, just shave the head dude. Shave it. You look like an asshole with the "ring around the hair". Shave it. My buddy did and it helped. You're still an asshole but you won't look like one.
 
2012-06-29 05:48:46 PM  

magusdevil: relcec: Rent Party: relcec: Quasar: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."

you heard it here folks,
forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while) instead of the catastrophic plan that is cheap and I like because it will save me from having to file for bankruptcy if something unexpected happens is actually providing me affordable healthcare.
oh, and the fact that medicaid won't be expanding very much so millions of low income folks won't be insured at all is just something to be ignored.

You're not being forced to buy it. You can not buy it if you don't want. The tax is likely cheaper than your catastrophic plan, so you can make that choice if you like.

are you sure that insurance companies aren't prohibited by congress from selling the product at all to those over 30?
everywhere I've read about it has been described as a prohibition on the insurance companies from even selling it to me.
I am forced to an overpriced, unwanted product, because congress won't allow me to buy the one I want, because frankly that just doesn't create enough of profit for the insurance companies.

so I can choose from opening myself up to the probability of a medical bankruptcy if I develop a mild condition or have an accident and pay a nice extra tax for the trouble, or I can choose the ridiculously overpriced product that congress has limited me to and that I won't ...


is Jean Schmidt you mom?
 
2012-06-29 05:48:51 PM  
Typical christian republican. Nothing new under the sun. These folks are farking insane.
 
2012-06-29 05:49:34 PM  

skullkrusher: is Jean Schmidt your mom?


I blame Bobby Jindal for my illiteracy
 
2012-06-29 05:49:44 PM  

mrshowrules: robsul82: Healthcare just ain't as sweet if poor people have it too. EVERYONE knows that.

When I can take my kids to the doctor and have them looked after, it warms my heart and makes me feel secure as a parent. When I know, my neighbour who was laid off can do the same thing for his children it sickens and disgusts me because it isn't fair.


I'm stealing this.
 
2012-06-29 05:50:39 PM  

Biological Ali: relcec: forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while)

I wonder; do statements like these represent an inability to rationally evaluate health insurance specifically, or are they indicative of a failure to comprehend the more general concept of expected utility altogether?


relatively young and healthy people like me without chronic medical issues behave rationally when we eschew the gold plated plan and stick with the catastrophic plan.
you're inability to judge the relative value of the plans offered to me and others like me, their respective prices, and the likelihood of an event that cost ten thousand, but not thirty thousand dollars or more is why you don't have a f*cking clue what you are talking about.

I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.

traditional plans offer little value to the young and healthy who have no chronic problems over catastrophic plans, unless they get to use pre tax dollars and their employer pays for 80% of the plan that the employer already gets a discount on over the individual buyer so they aren't the ones actually paying for the vast majority of it anyway.
 
2012-06-29 05:50:49 PM  

skullkrusher: skullkrusher: is Jean Schmidt your mom?

I blame Bobby Jindal for my illiteracy


oi41.tinypic.com
 
2012-06-29 05:52:40 PM  

relcec: Biological Ali: relcec: forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while)

I wonder; do statements like these represent an inability to rationally evaluate health insurance specifically, or are they indicative of a failure to comprehend the more general concept of expected utility altogether?

relatively young and healthy people like me without chronic medical issues behave rationally when we eschew the gold plated plan and stick with the catastrophic plan.
you're inability to judge the relative value of the plans offered to me and others like me, their respective prices, and the likelihood of an event that cost ten thousand, but not thirty thousand dollars or more is why you don't have a f*cking clue what you are talking about.

I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.

traditional plans offer little value to the young and healthy who have no chronic problems over catastrophic plans, unless they get to use pre tax dollars and their employer pays for 80% of the plan that the employer already gets a discount on over the individual buyer so they aren't the ones actually paying for the vast majority of it anyway.


I am 24 and I have the traditional one because I don't want to gamble my life on the offshot something does happen to me and I'm stuck with the bill.

People take risks over the stupidest things.
 
2012-06-29 05:53:20 PM  
It was either a traditional plan or one of those worthless HSA's everyone keeps talking about.
 
2012-06-29 05:55:00 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: I never would have expected a "conservative" to be so upset by the implementation of a Republican/Heritage Foundation plan.


When it's proposed by Bob Bennett, it's good.

When it's proposed by Ballsack HUSSEIN Zerobammey, it's bad.

/Seriously, these people are too dumb to have higher intellectual ideals or principles. It's a damn wonder she didn't poop into her hand and fling it at someone.
 
2012-06-29 05:55:42 PM  

GAT_00: Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the kind of person who represents the Republican party. Remember, vote Republican.


Too bad this is the kind of person who IS the Republican party.
 
2012-06-29 05:56:30 PM  
I concluded several years ago that Republicans are evil scum. I've yet to see an office-holding Republican who has challenged that belief.
 
2012-06-29 05:56:45 PM  

skullkrusher: is Jean Schmidt you mom?


no, but I did play the teacher in donnie darko, so I see why you might be confused.
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-06-29 05:58:53 PM  

heap: shamanwest: You know, Fark. If you're going to filter curse words, fine. You could at least have the filters match caps use.

it's like a sine wave of angry. revel in it.


I wonder if I can favorite you twice? Then you would be striped.
 
2012-06-29 05:59:19 PM  
C'mon, how am I not supposed to enjoy the level of schadenfreude the cons are handing to me on a silver platter? We're getting the best of both worlds here: We get to see what the cons would have done had the court sided with them, and we also get to see them throw an epic tantrum about how the court went the other way.
 
2012-06-29 06:00:57 PM  

relcec: again "the individual mandate had been struck down thus denying millions of people affordable health care" is bullshiat. that never would have happened. what actually happened is the medicaid mandate was stuck down, denying millions of low income people healthcare at all.

but you go on cheering subby, because obama said he won and the mandate for insurance company profits was actually the important bit.


I don't know that's the case.

That portion was an "opinion" by Roberts, joined by Kagan and Breyer. There were not a majority of votes for this section. It was not the "opinion of the court".
 
2012-06-29 06:02:37 PM  

relcec: I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.


At this point I can't even tell if you're being serious or not. If it's a joke, it's a pretty convoluted one. Now, I can understand the desire to not make it too obvious, but you've got to have a proper punchline in there somewhere.
 
2012-06-29 06:04:33 PM  

relcec: skullkrusher: is Jean Schmidt you mom?

no, but I did play the teacher in donnie darko, so I see why you might be confused.
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 321x240]


heh wasn't talking to you
 
2012-06-29 06:05:08 PM  

skullkrusher: relcec: skullkrusher: is Jean Schmidt you mom?

no, but I did play the teacher in donnie darko, so I see why you might be confused.
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 321x240]

heh wasn't talking to you


or was I...
 
2012-06-29 06:05:58 PM  

relcec: Quasar: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."

you heard it here folks,
forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while) instead of the catastrophic plan that is cheap and I like because it will save me from having to file for bankruptcy if something unexpected happens is actually providing me affordable healthcare.
oh, and the fact that medicaid won't be expanding very much so millions of low income folks won't be insured at all is just something to be ignored.


It's predicted to be expanded significantly in nearly every state.
 
2012-06-29 06:10:24 PM  

relcec: I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.


So keep your catastrophic plan and pay the tax penalty. You'll get to avoid paying into a much broader yet more expensive collective risk pool (screw you!), yet have the catastrophic-only coverage you have predetermined is all you'll ever need (I got mine!). Jesus, do we have to do everything for you?

Of course, when you are diagnosed with a condition that requires long term care and treatment, don't you dare go racing out to buy yourself one of those "traditional" plans that you haven't been paying premiums on for years, because that would increase premiums on the rest of us. As you're so keen on things being fair and making your own decisions out of enlightened self-interest, I'm sure you'll pay for all your treatments out of pocket with all the money you've saved. Because if you don't, you'll become everything you hate, won't you?
 
2012-06-29 06:11:00 PM  
I guess her performance is what happens when someone truly subscribes to the idea that ACA is some kind of job-destroying economy-eating government leviathan, conjured by the Obama Cabal specifically to consume all that is right and good with America and to excrete a desolate, godless hellscape where once stood a proud country.

Or something. I guess.
 
2012-06-29 06:11:59 PM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: C'mon, how am I not supposed to enjoy the level of schadenfreude the cons are handing to me on a silver platter? We're getting the best of both worlds here: We get to see what the cons would have done had the court sided with them, and we also get to see them throw an epic tantrum about how the court went the other way.


Their tears of impotent rage nourish my soul.
 
2012-06-29 06:12:58 PM  

skullkrusher: relcec: oh, and please don't look behind the curtain at the millions of low income families that aren't insured at all.

the bill has subsidies in it


The troll hasn't read the bill, or studied it, yet is against it.

I am Shocked!
 
2012-06-29 06:13:45 PM  
Some of the poutrage on this reminds of the stories you hear about people who refuse to pay their optional firefighting tax and then are upset when their house burns down and the fire department doesn't put it out: Link

I'm unwilling to hear an argument against the mandate until the person making it first admits they have absolutely no problem with an uninsurable family member dying in the emergency room because doctors refuse to treat them.

There are plenty of things I don't like about Obamacare, but I have yet to hear the alternate proposal to be debated.
 
2012-06-29 06:15:24 PM  

FuturePastNow: I concluded several years ago that Republicans are evil scum. I've yet to see an office-holding Republican who has challenged that belief.


Maureen Walsh. There might be a few others, but she's the only one I can think of at the moment.
 
2012-06-29 06:18:06 PM  

Mrtraveler01: relcec: Biological Ali: relcec: forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while)

I wonder; do statements like these represent an inability to rationally evaluate health insurance specifically, or are they indicative of a failure to comprehend the more general concept of expected utility altogether?

relatively young and healthy people like me without chronic medical issues behave rationally when we eschew the gold plated plan and stick with the catastrophic plan.
you're inability to judge the relative value of the plans offered to me and others like me, their respective prices, and the likelihood of an event that cost ten thousand, but not thirty thousand dollars or more is why you don't have a f*cking clue what you are talking about.

I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.

traditional plans offer little value to the young and healthy who have no chronic problems over catastrophic plans, unless they get to use pre tax dollars and their employer pays for 80% of the plan that the employer already gets a discount on over the individual buyer so they aren't the ones actually paying for the vast majority of it anyway.

I am 24 and I have the traditional one because I don't want to gamble my life on the offshot something does happen to me and I'm stuck with the bill.

People take risks over the stupidest things.


what are you gambling by buying catastrophic? that you won't immediately get leukemia, or hit by a bus, or shot, which are all fairly unlikely, before the savings can make up for the cost of a catastrophic event? I mean you are 24, if anything happens it will be a car wreck. you aren't gonna get lung cancer or break a hip lying down in bed tonight.

over 12 years it becomes more likely, but by then you have the savings to pay for it and then some.

does your employer pay for it?
I used to have the traditional one before school when I worked for a hospital. but my employer paid like 90% of the cost and I got no benefit from taking a lesser plan, so the choice was easy.

now I work for a very small outfit (like 5 people, sometimes only 4 when work slows a bit) and my boss/the owner gives me $3k a year medical allowance to do what I want with it. I can save it, blow it at the race track, or buy insurance with it. so the choice is easy, I buy the catastrophic and bank at least $350 a month in savings.

but to each his own. if you feel more comfortable with it, then I'm happy you can afford it and have found something you like.
 
2012-06-29 06:18:19 PM  

sabreWulf07: relcec: I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.

So keep your catastrophic plan and pay the tax penalty. You'll get to avoid paying into a much broader yet more expensive collective risk pool (screw you!), yet have the catastrophic-only coverage you have predetermined is all you'll ever need (I got mine!). Jesus, do we have to do everything for you?

Of course, when you are diagnosed with a condition that requires long term care and treatment, don't you dare go racing out to buy yourself one of those "traditional" plans that you haven't been paying premiums on for years, because that would increase premiums on the rest of us. As you're so keen on things being fair and making your own decisions out of enlightened self-interest, I'm sure you'll pay for all your treatments out of pocket with all the money you've saved. Because if you don't, you'll become everything you hate, won't you?


See, you all are missing the point. Health insurance and healthcare is supposed to be available when "THEY" want it or need it, but not generally available for those who don't really need it. "THEY" only use it when they really really need it; but everyone else is just too lazy or thoughtless to not need it.

Or something. I'm f*cked if I can understand why people who have health insurance don't want those of us without it to be unable to get it without paying $$$$ in premiums or jumping through a carnival full of hoops. And I REALLY don't understand why they want to deny it to those of us with pre-existing conditions that insurers won't cover AT ALL.
 
2012-06-29 06:19:15 PM  
yeeeeeeeeeeeeeees.com
 
2012-06-29 06:19:30 PM  

balki1867:
There are plenty of things I don't like about Obamacare, but I have yet to hear the alternate proposal to be debated.


Single payer. And the reason you haven't heard it debated is because the Obama administration took it off the table back when it still negotiated with terrorists.
 
2012-06-29 06:27:04 PM  

Gyrfalcon: sabreWulf07: relcec: I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.

So keep your catastrophic plan and pay the tax penalty. You'll get to avoid paying into a much broader yet more expensive collective risk pool (screw you!), yet have the catastrophic-only coverage you have predetermined is all you'll ever need (I got mine!). Jesus, do we have to do everything for you?

Of course, when you are diagnosed with a condition that requires long term care and treatment, don't you dare go racing out to buy yourself one of those "traditional" plans that you haven't been paying premiums on for years, because that would increase premiums on the rest of us. As you're so keen on things being fair and making your own decisions out of enlightened self-interest, I'm sure you'll pay for all your treatments out of pocket with all the money you've saved. Because if you don't, you'll become everything you hate, won't you?

See, you all are missing the point. Health insurance and healthcare is supposed to be available when "THEY" want it or need it, but not generally available for those who don't really need it. "THEY" only use it when they really really need it; but everyone else is just too lazy or thoughtless to not need it.

Or something. I'm f*cked if I can understand why people who have health insurance don't want those of us without it to be unable to get it without paying $$$$ in premiums or jumping through a carnival full of hoops. And I REALLY don't understand why they want to deny it to those of us with pre-existing conditions that insurers won't cover AT ALL.


It's because conservatives see poverty, ill health, indignity, etc., as life's proper punishments for moral weakness. When a sane person uses the term "social justice," s/he means taking steps to diminish the bad effects of inequality. When a conservative uses the term "social justice," s/he means watching people s/he regards as bad suffer.

Ya rly. That's rly it.
 
2012-06-29 06:27:30 PM  

gilgigamesh: I don't know that's the case.


Ah, nevermind. I was mistaken. Ginsburg wrote separately to agree in Roberts' remedy for his perception of a problem with the medicaid expansion, even though she didn't agree there was a problem in the first place. Basically it looks like she compromised to preserve a majority.
 
2012-06-29 06:30:56 PM  

relcec: but to each his own. if you feel more comfortable with it, then I'm happy you can afford it and have found something you like.


On the off chance that you're serious...

Let's say a guy who has chosen to remain completely uninsured comes up to you and say "I haven't been sick at all these past five years, look at how much money I've saved!" What would your response be?
 
2012-06-29 06:48:19 PM  

bugontherug: Gyrfalcon: sabreWulf07: relcec: I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.

So keep your catastrophic plan and pay the tax penalty. You'll get to avoid paying into a much broader yet more expensive collective risk pool (screw you!), yet have the catastrophic-only coverage you have predetermined is all you'll ever need (I got mine!). Jesus, do we have to do everything for you?

Of course, when you are diagnosed with a condition that requires long term care and treatment, don't you dare go racing out to buy yourself one of those "traditional" plans that you haven't been paying premiums on for years, because that would increase premiums on the rest of us. As you're so keen on things being fair and making your own decisions out of enlightened self-interest, I'm sure you'll pay for all your treatments out of pocket with all the money you've saved. Because if you don't, you'll become everything you hate, won't you?

See, you all are missing the point. Health insurance and healthcare is supposed to be available when "THEY" want it or need it, but not generally available for those who don't really need it. "THEY" only use it when they really really need it; but everyone else is just too lazy or thoughtless to not need it.

Or something. I'm f*cked if I can understand why people who have health insurance don't want those of us without it to be unable to get it without paying $$$$ in premiums or jumping through a carnival full of hoops. And I REALLY don't understand why they want to deny it to those of us with pre-existing conditions that insurers won't cover AT ALL.

It's because conservatives see poverty, ill health, indignity, etc., as life's proper punishments for moral weakness. When a sane person uses the term "social justice," s/he means taki ...


That is the ONLY thing I can think of that makes sense.
 
2012-06-29 06:57:59 PM  
B-bu-but premiums will go up under Obamacare!

static6.businessinsider.com
No shiat, they've been going up since forever.
 
2012-06-29 07:03:40 PM  
relcec:

I think it was September of 2009 that anyone gave you any real attention except to mock you. How time flies.
 
2012-06-29 07:07:28 PM  

sabreWulf07: relcec: I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.

So keep your catastrophic plan and pay the tax penalty. You'll get to avoid paying into a much broader yet more expensive collective risk pool (screw you!), yet have the catastrophic-only coverage you have predetermined is all you'll ever need (I got mine!). Jesus, do we have to do everything for you?

Of course, when you are diagnosed with a condition that requires long term care and treatment, don't you dare go racing out to buy yourself one of those "traditional" plans that you haven't been paying premiums on for years, because that would increase premiums on the rest of us. As you're so keen on things being fair and making your own decisions out of enlightened self-interest, I'm sure you'll pay for all your treatments out of pocket with all the money you've saved. Because if you don't, you'll become everything you hate, won't you?




I can't keep the catastrophic plan. the healthplans are prohibited from selling it to me.
and me buying full cost insurance personally doesn't put me in a collective risk pool.
do you know anything about that which you speak? it is individual insurance based in large part on actuarial data. I don't get to pay what you pay, I don't get to join your group plan, I don't get the discount you get from your employer, we all aren't going to be in one big group plan, you dumbf*ck.

I can and will be charged more as my risk increases, while you are protected statutorily from paying more than anyone else because you have a uterus and a vagina capable of having a baby and that gets irritated when people point out the inconvenient truth to you.
so try to keep the f*ck up if you want to have a conversation.

oh, and you have no idea what I actually hate.



Biological Ali: relcec: but to each his own. if you feel more comfortable with it, then I'm happy you can afford it and have found something you like.

On the off chance that you're serious...

Let's say a guy who has chosen to remain completely uninsured comes up to you and say "I haven't been sick at all these past five years, look at how much money I've saved!" What would your response be?


I'm not slightly interested in conversing with you. do me a favor, just stfu for the rest of the day so I don't feel obliged to keep educating you about how the world actually works.


Mrtraveler01: It was either a traditional plan or one of those worthless HSA's everyone keeps talking about.


I didn't ask if it was traditional. I got that vibe from you when you said it was traditional the first time. I asked if your employer was paying for it and that's why it makes sense.


gilgigamesh: I don't know that's the case.

That portion was an "opinion" by Roberts, joined by Kagan and Breyer. There were not a majority of votes for this section. It was not the "opinion of the court".



you sure scalia and thomas didn't join that part? I probably don't have to tell you it would be odd if kagan and breyer thought the feds were coercing states too much, but scalia and thomas were cool with it.
 
2012-06-29 07:08:40 PM  
So, am I to infer from relcec's posts & the responses that catastrophic plans do not meet the minimum coverage requirements in the AHCA? Does anybody know what the thresholds are?
 
2012-06-29 07:14:48 PM  

cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.


The problem wasn't so much that they had health care as that they had it in a very sporadic way. If someone without health care because of, say, a pre-existing condition, had a heart attack, they would go to the emergency room, and either a) be crippled by debt, or b) have the taxpayers pick up the debt.

And they still weren't treated for heart disease. People were being left with fatal diseases until it flared up and they could get treatment at the ER.

This was happening to kids, to elderly people, to the poor...they didn't have health care, they had a very dangerous situation, and the bill corrected a lot of it.

/I actually can't get a diagnoses for Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome because it would be a pre-existing condition, which means that my mother's choice was to either a) make sure I could never buy healthcare again, thus leaving me with crippling debt or b) leave me in a position where, if I ever need surgery, it's a 50/50 chance the doctor will actually listen when I tell them I have defective collagen. Defective collagen seriously hurts your ability to recover properly, but we ended up going with b, because 50/50 chance of getting screwed is far less than 100%, which was a.
 
2012-06-29 07:16:45 PM  

relcec: I can't keep the catastrophic plan.


I don't know where you're getting your information, but good news! The menu of healthcare policy options under the act clearly includes a catastrophic policy for young adults that do not usually purchase standard health and medical insurance; and for anyone exempted from the insurance mandate.

Maybe you should actually f*cking read it?
 
2012-06-29 07:16:47 PM  
"Yes, people can be uninsured again! Praise baby Jeebus!"
 
2012-06-29 07:17:02 PM  
My favorite is still the reaction from Florida CFO Jeff Atwater. Link
 
2012-06-29 07:17:16 PM  

fringedmyotis: So, am I to infer from relcec's posts & the responses that catastrophic plans do not meet the minimum coverage requirements in the AHCA? Does anybody know what the thresholds are?


30% copay or less, I have no idea on the max deductible. They have removed tax exemptions from HSA's over I think 2500 a year per person. It limits health insurance premiums to around 9% of your income, which is reasonable particularly for people with unfortunate conditions that would traditionally lead to premiums being thousands a month. The short and sweet on his situation is "hey I'm reach enough I can get a plan with a 10k deductible and stick 10k in a tax free account. fark you people that make 30k a year and the insurance folks want 1300 a month to give you the same plan I have."
 
2012-06-29 07:18:37 PM  

PsiChick: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

The problem wasn't so much that they had health care as that they had it in a very sporadic way. If someone without health care because of, say, a pre-existing condition, had a heart attack, they would go to the emergency room, and either a) be crippled by debt, or b) have the taxpayers pick up the debt.

And they still weren't treated for heart disease. People were being left with fatal diseases until it flared up and they could get treatment at the ER.

This was happening to kids, to elderly people, to the poor...they didn't have health care, they had a very dangerous situation, and the bill corrected a lot of it.

/I actually can't get a diagnoses for Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome because it would be a pre-existing condition, which means that my mother's choice was to either a) make sure I could never buy healthcare again, thus leaving me with crippling debt or b) leave me in a position where, if I ever need surgery, it's a 50/50 chance the doctor will actually listen when I tell them I have defective collagen. Defective collagen seriously hurts your ability to recover properly, but we ended up going with b, because 50/50 chance of getting screwed is far less than 100%, which was a.


This is what it's all about. Making sure people are covered. If you can't get your diagnosis now, you will within the next couple of years.
 
2012-06-29 07:21:08 PM  

bugontherug: This is what it's all about. Making sure people are covered. If you can't get your diagnosis now, you will within the next couple of years.


Hahaha, aren't you funny. I'm waiting until I know this law is staying. The last thing I need is to have a pre-existing condition. I'm not rich and I never will be, so this really isn't something I can afford to screw up.

/Life. Isn't it wonderful.
//But yeah, I'm not totally cheering for Obamacare out of altruism.
 
2012-06-29 07:30:19 PM  

Jackson Herring: Blues_X: "OH GOOD! THE POOR ARE STILL FARKED!"

Thank God Fartbongo.


They are still farked.
 
2012-06-29 07:32:23 PM  

s2s2s2: Jackson Herring: Blues_X: "OH GOOD! THE POOR ARE STILL FARKED!"

Thank God Fartbongo.

They are still farked.


Yeah but at least now they will be covered for the torn rectum.
 
2012-06-29 07:33:58 PM  

PsiChick: Hahaha, aren't you funny. I'm waiting until I know this law is staying. The last thing I need is to have a pre-existing condition. I'm not rich and I never will be, so this really isn't something I can afford to screw up.


It will be staying. The Republicans have to get a White House, Senate, and House trifecta to repeal it. And even then, unless they abolish the filibuster (not very likely), they'll have to get 60 votes to repeal it.

I know some people are saying they can repeal the mandate with 51 Senate votes because it's a tax, and therefore can't be filibustered. But they don't see the big picture: if you repeal the mandate without also repealing the pre-existing condition discrimination ban, you'll bankrupt the insurance industry. Rational actors will just wait until they're sick to buy health insurance.

And even if the mandate can be repealed with 51 votes (and I'm not sure it really can), you still have to get 60 votes to repeal the pre-existing condition discrimination ban. I promise you, even the Republicans will not repeal the mandate unless they can also repeal the pre-existing condition discrimination ban.

I understand your caution. But Obamacare (and I use the term with a positive connotation) has overcome its greatest obstacle. It now has the Court's imprimatur, which will increase its popularity. And many popular provisions will be going into effect in the near future, which will increase its popularity even more. In August, people are gonna get their first health insurance rebate checks, for example. "Repeal and replace" isn't even gonna get past the repeal part.
 
2012-06-29 07:35:20 PM  
What the fark? It seemed everyone around her murmured but she was shrieking.
 
2012-06-29 07:40:16 PM  

jayhawk88: robsul82:What we need to do is invent some alternative that is as important as health care, and is something only the super rich can possibly afford. Maybe pay off a bunch of doctors to start telling their rich patients that humanity is evolving to a higher plane of existence, ascending to a higher state of mental being, and they can get in on it if they go through many expensive, complicated procedures. Feed them a bunch of vitamins and placebos and make them do a bunch of yoga and meditation or something. Every 6 months do some blood work that shows a marked increase in the midichlorians or whatever. No one ever actually ascends of course, but while experts believe that the human species must still evolve through several more generations before ascension can be obtained on a living host, they're quite certain that at the moment of death, those who have endured the rigors of these procedures will almost certainly ascend.

The only real danger I guess is that it might turn into a religion, or Scientology sues it out of existence, but you get some good writers on this I think you could make a go of it.


This is reminiscent of my plan to eliminate the deficit. What we need is a scam that appeals to rich folks the way the lottery appeals to the poor. Hence the Federal Tax Raffle. Tickets cost $1000 each ($1000? $5000? I'm open to suggestions.) Once a month there's a drawing and the winner never has to pay Federal income tax again as long as he lives. If you figure the top 1% will buy ten tickets each month and the rest of the top five percent one ticket a month , that around $50 billion a month, $600 billion a year in free money for the gummint. A dozen tax-free millionaires a year would be a small price to pay fpr that income stream.

You're welcome.
 
2012-06-29 07:40:43 PM  

relcec: I'm not slightly interested in conversing with you. do me a favor, just stfu for the rest of the day so I don't feel obliged to keep educating you about how the world actually works.


No please, do go on - I could use a good laugh. Tell me more about how the world works!

At the very least I'm fairly confident (after those last few responses anyway) that you're not actually being serious here, thereby allowing me to enjoy your comedic stylings while avoiding the "I wish I could reach through this screen and strangle you" response that one is susceptible to when reading things like this.
 
2012-06-29 07:53:29 PM  

relcec:
do you know anything about that which you speak? it is individual insurance based in large part on actuarial data. I don't get to pay what you pay, I don't get to join your group plan, I don't get the discount you get from your employer, we all aren't going to be in one big group plan, you dumbf*ck.


I don't mean to burst your bubble too much, relcec, because you sure do seem to be having fun... but those statewide exchanges by which individuals can purchase insurance through without insurer support, many of them are already structured as large groups... so they are group plans, mind you not from employers... but yes, many of us will all be in one big group plan, you dumbf*ck.
 
2012-06-29 07:54:20 PM  

DeltaPunch: mrshowrules: Diogenes: vernonFL: Is that what it sounds like when a 60 year old conservative woman has an orgasm?

It's never happened before, so it's tough to say.

Someone has just risen to the top of my list of people in the GOP that I absolutely hate.

Here's mine, what I believe are the worst of the worst:




Now with bonus "mean" Jean Schmidt.


I see the four dudes. Why no pic of Jean?
 
2012-06-29 07:57:16 PM  
www.popehat.com

The hyperbolic imagery is good for the lulz, and isn't that the second best healthcare of all?
 
2012-06-29 07:59:11 PM  

relcec: again "the individual mandate had been struck down thus denying millions of people affordable health care" is bullshiat. that never would have happened. what actually happened is the medicaid mandate was stuck down, denying millions of low income people healthcare at all.

but you go on cheering subby, because obama said he won and the mandate for insurance company profits was actually the important bit.


You're so full of shiat that it's dripping out of your nostrils.
 
2012-06-29 07:59:21 PM  

heap: shamanwest: You know, Fark. If you're going to filter curse words, fine. You could at least have the filters match caps use.

it's like a sine wave of angry. revel in it.


I got a square wave, binary vibe. I need to loosen up my left brain.
 
2012-06-29 08:00:16 PM  

Party Boy: GAT_00: Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the kind of person who represents the Republican party. Remember, vote Republican.

[i.imgur.com image 300x300]


Is that some lesbian?
 
2012-06-29 08:13:29 PM  

relcec: this was literally the worst outcome imaginable, and it is telling that you are cheering for it. the people who were least able to afford it won't be insured. you're cheering for a ridiculous outcome subby. HCA's stock has gone up 20% in two days, people are going to be forced to become profit centers for the insurance companies, the rich are getting richer and the poor got f*cked again.


It really is bizarre watching Democrats and "progressives" cheering and celebrating over the upholding of a law literally written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies.
 
2012-06-29 08:16:08 PM  

star_topology: B-bu-but premiums will go up under Obamacare!

[static6.businessinsider.com image 610x448]
No shiat, they've been going up since forever.


Now everyone can share in the fun! Whether they want to or not.
 
2012-06-29 08:19:09 PM  

jigger: relcec: this was literally the worst outcome imaginable, and it is telling that you are cheering for it. the people who were least able to afford it won't be insured. you're cheering for a ridiculous outcome subby. HCA's stock has gone up 20% in two days, people are going to be forced to become profit centers for the insurance companies, the rich are getting richer and the poor got f*cked again.

It really is bizarre watching Democrats and "progressives" cheering and celebrating over the upholding of a law literally written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies.


You are literally worse than Hitler.
 
2012-06-29 08:20:41 PM  

Mrtraveler01: relcec: Biological Ali: relcec: forcing me to personally buy a full cost healthplan for $6k a year that I don't f*cking want (because I couldn't possibly use enough meds and go to the doctor enough to make it worth my while)

I wonder; do statements like these represent an inability to rationally evaluate health insurance specifically, or are they indicative of a failure to comprehend the more general concept of expected utility altogether?

relatively young and healthy people like me without chronic medical issues behave rationally when we eschew the gold plated plan and stick with the catastrophic plan.
you're inability to judge the relative value of the plans offered to me and others like me, their respective prices, and the likelihood of an event that cost ten thousand, but not thirty thousand dollars or more is why you don't have a f*cking clue what you are talking about.

I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.

traditional plans offer little value to the young and healthy who have no chronic problems over catastrophic plans, unless they get to use pre tax dollars and their employer pays for 80% of the plan that the employer already gets a discount on over the individual buyer so they aren't the ones actually paying for the vast majority of it anyway.

I am 24 and I have the traditional one because I don't want to gamble my life on the offshot something does happen to me and I'm stuck with the bill.

People take risks over the stupidest things.


Like this?

"I'm healthy! I don't need insurance and I sure as sh*t don't f*cking want it! I'm a f*cking 21-year-old red blooded American motherf*cker and nothing bad will EVER happen to me! I'm healthy! I'm healthy! Why do I need insurance, I'm young and healthy!! Leave me alone! Now hold my beer..."

/that guy will Darwin and Murphy's Law himself into a hospital bill that will ruin him and he'll have no one to blame but will try anyway
//insurance. you hope you never have to use it but you'll be super glad you had it when the hammer falls on you from out of nowhere.
 
2012-06-29 08:20:46 PM  

relcec: I mean you are 24, if anything happens it will be a car wreck. you aren't gonna get lung cancer or break a hip lying down in bed tonight.


Roughly a year and a half ago I suffered a severe femoral hip fracture in my left leg after slipping on black ice and falling. I was 28. It happens.
 
2012-06-29 08:23:07 PM  

Bill Murray said I was weird: relcec: I mean you are 24, if anything happens it will be a car wreck. you aren't gonna get lung cancer or break a hip lying down in bed tonight.

Roughly a year and a half ago I suffered a severe femoral hip fracture in my left leg after slipping on black ice and falling. I was 28. It happens.


Good friend of mine's 17 year old son came down with a bad case of testicular cancer. $800,000 later, the kid made it.
 
2012-06-29 08:27:12 PM  

relcec:

what are you gambling by buying catastrophic? that you won't immediately get leukemia, or hit by a bus, or shot, which are all fairly unlikely, before the savings can make up for the cost of a catastrophic event? I mean you are 24, if anything happens it will be a car wreck. you a ...


When I was 24, I got diagnosed with MS. Reality doesn't jive with your version of who needs healthcare... reality is not subject to your ideology... it just is what it is.
 
2012-06-29 08:28:43 PM  

jigger: relcec: this was literally the worst outcome imaginable, and it is telling that you are cheering for it. the people who were least able to afford it won't be insured. you're cheering for a ridiculous outcome subby. HCA's stock has gone up 20% in two days, people are going to be forced to become profit centers for the insurance companies, the rich are getting richer and the poor got f*cked again.

It really is bizarre watching Democrats and "progressives" cheering and celebrating over the upholding of a law literally written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies.


The law is a compromise in many ways... the part you don't seem to get is that to Democrats and Progressives, compromise isn't a dirty word.
 
2012-06-29 08:30:07 PM  

jigger: relcec: this was literally the worst outcome imaginable, and it is telling that you are cheering for it. the people who were least able to afford it won't be insured. you're cheering for a ridiculous outcome subby. HCA's stock has gone up 20% in two days, people are going to be forced to become profit centers for the insurance companies, the rich are getting richer and the poor got f*cked again.

It really is bizarre watching Democrats and "progressives" cheering and celebrating over the upholding of a law literally written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies.


Because Republicans really wanted UHC, right? Ya, they wanted to get rid of private insurance companies I'm sure of it.
 
2012-06-29 08:32:11 PM  

Rent Party: Bill Murray said I was weird: relcec: I mean you are 24, if anything happens it will be a car wreck. you aren't gonna get lung cancer or break a hip lying down in bed tonight.

Roughly a year and a half ago I suffered a severe femoral hip fracture in my left leg after slipping on black ice and falling. I was 28. It happens.

Good friend of mine's 17 year old son came down with a bad case of testicular cancer. $800,000 later, the kid made it.


No no no, that just doesn't happen in the Conservative world. Unless you are poor. Or non-White? Are you one of those?
 
2012-06-29 08:37:49 PM  

Rent Party: Bill Murray said I was weird: relcec: I mean you are 24, if anything happens it will be a car wreck. you aren't gonna get lung cancer or break a hip lying down in bed tonight.

Roughly a year and a half ago I suffered a severe femoral hip fracture in my left leg after slipping on black ice and falling. I was 28. It happens.

Good friend of mine's 17 year old son came down with a bad case of testicular cancer. $800,000 later, the kid made it.


A guy in my D&D group got Hodgkin's lymphoma when he was 22. Don't know how much it cost, but I know he was in treatment for two years and had multiple surgeries, so it couldn't have been cheap.
 
2012-06-29 08:38:32 PM  

Biological Ali: relcec: I've had a catastrophic plan since the beginning of law school. it has been 7 years, I've saved $35k over traditional plans. I could pay my 10k deductible 3 years straight with the money I've already saved. in short, as usual you don't know wtf you are talking about.

At this point I can't even tell if you're being serious or not. If it's a joke, it's a pretty convoluted one. Now, I can understand the desire to not make it too obvious, but you've got to have a proper punchline in there somewhere.


I'm just surprised he isn't blaming everything on immigrants.
 
2012-06-29 08:41:13 PM  

Diogenes: mrshowrules: Diogenes: vernonFL: Is that what it sounds like when a 60 year old conservative woman has an orgasm?

It's never happened before, so it's tough to say.

Someone has just risen to the top of my list of people in the GOP that I absolutely hate.

The top of my list is pretty crowded.


Keep adding them and hopefully the list will become so top-heavy it'll tip over and some unfortunate injuries and casualties may result.

Of course, they have the Cadillac health insurance plan, so what the hell do they care?
 
2012-06-29 08:42:24 PM  

2wolves: relcec:

I think it was September of 2009 that anyone gave you any real attention except to mock you. How time flies.


Dish, dish, dish.
 
2012-06-29 08:44:21 PM  
i48.tinypic.com
She's got a face that just radiates love and compassion, amirite?? Like a sunny morning.
 
2012-06-29 08:53:59 PM  

clambam: This is reminiscent of my plan to eliminate the deficit.


Sales tax on stocks. Two percent of each share's value.

You do the math.
 
Ab3
2012-06-29 08:54:25 PM  

Churchy LaFemme: [i48.tinypic.com image 320x240]
She's got a face that just radiates love and compassion, amirite?? Like a sunny morning.


I hope that isn't her 'O face'
 
2012-06-29 09:10:27 PM  
You can quit with the "it's about giving people affordable health care!" line, nobody actually believes that, including you so just stop.

I too would have celebrated a victory for freedom if the SCOTUS had struck down ObamaCare, but alas it wasn't meant to be. I just take solace in the fact that I was correct about ObamaCare not being Constitutional under the commerce clause... A fact liberals should probably start admitting they were wrong about.

Comically the conservatives called it a tax, the liberals denied that, and now it's being declared Constitutional... As a tax.
 
2012-06-29 09:15:18 PM  

randomjsa: I just take solace in the fact that I was correct about ObamaCare not being Constitutional under the commerce clause... A fact liberals should probably start admitting they were wrong about.

Heh heh

...yeah, OK *snicker* you were totally right *tee-hee* Boy, libs really took one on the chin *BWAA-HA-HA-HAAAA!!*
 
2012-06-29 09:19:49 PM  

randomjsa: You can quit with the "it's about giving people affordable health care!" line, nobody actually believes that, including you so just stop.

I too would have celebrated a victory for freedom if the SCOTUS had struck down ObamaCare, but alas it wasn't meant to be. I just take solace in the fact that I was correct about ObamaCare not being Constitutional under the commerce clause... A fact liberals should probably start admitting they were wrong about.

Comically the conservatives called it a tax, the liberals denied that, and now it's being declared Constitutional... As a tax.


"Somebody call for a Constitutional Scholar?"

writingjunkie.net
 
2012-06-29 09:20:04 PM  

jigger: relcec: this was literally the worst outcome imaginable, and it is telling that you are cheering for it. the people who were least able to afford it won't be insured. you're cheering for a ridiculous outcome subby. HCA's stock has gone up 20% in two days, people are going to be forced to become profit centers for the insurance companies, the rich are getting richer and the poor got f*cked again.

It really is bizarre watching Democrats and "progressives" cheering and celebrating over the upholding of a law literally written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies.


So, what exactly is the Republicans' problem with what was originally the Republicans' plan? Shouldn't you be rejoicing in the streets? Aren't corporations not people and your friends?
 
2012-06-29 09:34:17 PM  

randomjsa: You can quit with the "it's about giving people affordable health care!" line, nobody actually believes that, including you so just stop.

I too would have celebrated a victory for freedom if the SCOTUS had struck down ObamaCare, but alas it wasn't meant to be. I just take solace in the fact that I was correct about ObamaCare not being Constitutional under the commerce clause... A fact liberals should probably start admitting they were wrong about.

Comically the conservatives called it a tax, the liberals denied that, and now it's being declared Constitutional... As a tax.


Do you ever, ever get tired of being a hateful asshole? Of course you're the single biggest coward on this site, so I expect you'll avoid answering this, like you do to everyone else who calls out your BS.
 
2012-06-29 09:37:06 PM  

Glenford: Remember this thread when people complained about the lack of decorum by the director of the DNC? I wonder if they're going to condemn this as well.


They never will, becuase they're "'mericuns." Whatever the hell that means.

/idiots
//morans
 
2012-06-29 09:38:08 PM  
She and other terrorists such as randomjsa should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for treason.
 
2012-06-29 09:40:31 PM  

relcec: what's funny about subby's ridiculous take on this is striking down the individual mandate wasn't going to cost anyone their healthcare that got provided it for the first time through the ACA.


Evasion to the point noted.
 
2012-06-29 10:00:21 PM  
I'm amazed that some people truly believe that "freedom" means "denying others access to healthcare."
 
2012-06-29 10:09:43 PM  
I saw a repub Congressman being interviewed on CNN this morning and he said "Fifty-four percent of Americans don't approve of Obamacare." The interviewer said "Yes, but that's because 15% of Americans disapprove because they think it doesn't go far enough," and he answered, I kid you not, "Let's not split hairs."
 
2012-06-29 10:11:06 PM  
best part..... forever
 
2012-06-29 10:17:48 PM  

jigger: It really is bizarre watching Democrats and "progressives" cheering and celebrating over the upholding of a law literally written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies.


Because the insurance companies aren't going anywhere. You'd have to get rid of the most conservative four-fifths of Congress before you could propose something that would eliminate private insurance as the primary means of financing medical care.

GIVEN that no healthcare reform could have passed Congress except that which relied on private insurance, this was about as good as it could get. It's a step in the right direction anyway.
 
2012-06-29 10:21:22 PM  
I think people like reclec are comical. You started law school 7 years ago and you still don't have a job with real health insurance as a benefit? What the fark is wrong with you? You're 29, you're not "young" anymore, dipshiat.

I'm 31, trust me. Get a real job, get real insurance, grow the fark up, and get some personal responsibility.

My "taxes" went up by exactly nothing yesterday. Why? Because I'm a grown-ass man and I already have insurance.
 
2012-06-29 10:23:27 PM  

The Homer Tax: My "taxes" went up by exactly nothing yesterday. Why? Because I'm a grown-ass man and I already have insurance.


and you don't make enough to be hit with the non-mandate related tax increases in the bill ;)
 
2012-06-29 10:30:04 PM  

sabreWulf07: Maybe you should actually f*cking read it?


Come on... Be nice. How many people actually know what the min coverage is for their state auto insurance? They just ask for the minimum and then never look at the f*cking contract except for how much they owe.

I'm sure it will be the same thing with this and the only time they will know their coverage is when something happens.
 
2012-06-29 10:30:59 PM  

randomjsa: Comically the conservatives called it a tax, the liberals denied that, and now it's being declared Constitutional... As a tax.


Actually, that isn't what the court said at all. Roberts' opinion is that it is NOT a tax, but a tax penalty.

That's why Roberts rejected the notion that the Anti-Injunction Act would prevent the question from being decided until 2014 - he said for the purposes of that law, it is a penalty and not a tax.

In short, something can derive from Congress' authority to tax without BEING a tax. A tax credit would be a good example - it's clearly not a tax, but it's Constitutionally permissible because it derives from the authority to tax. Likewise, a tax penalty is not a tax, but it derives from the power to tax.
 
2012-06-29 10:37:18 PM  

relcec: you sure scalia and thomas didn't join that part? I probably don't have to tell you it would be odd if kagan and breyer thought the feds were coercing states too much, but scalia and thomas were cool with it.


Scalia, Thomas and Alito did not concur in any portion of the decision, and filed a separate dissent.

Summary of who concurred and who dissented:

ROBERTS, C. J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II, and III-C, in which GINSBURG, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined; an opinion with respect to Part IV, in which BREYER and KAGAN, JJ., joined; and an opinion with respect to Parts III-A, III-B, and III-D. GINSBURG, J., filed an opinion concurring in part, concurring in the judgment in part, and dissenting in part, in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined, and in which BREYER and KAGAN, JJ., joined as to Parts I, II, III, and IV. SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., filed a dissenting opinion. THOMAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

Full text here: Link Enjoy.
 
2012-06-29 10:42:10 PM  

skullkrusher: The Homer Tax: My "taxes" went up by exactly nothing yesterday. Why? Because I'm a grown-ass man and I already have insurance.

and you don't make enough to be hit with the non-mandate related tax increases in the bill ;)


Serious question: I might; what are the income specific tax raises in the bill? All I rember is nonsense like the tanning tax and the medical equipment tax.
 
2012-06-29 10:49:01 PM  

Bill Murray said I was weird: randomjsa: You can quit with the "it's about giving people affordable health care!" line, nobody actually believes that, including you so just stop.

I too would have celebrated a victory for freedom if the SCOTUS had struck down ObamaCare, but alas it wasn't meant to be. I just take solace in the fact that I was correct about ObamaCare not being Constitutional under the commerce clause... A fact liberals should probably start admitting they were wrong about.

Comically the conservatives called it a tax, the liberals denied that, and now it's being declared Constitutional... As a tax.

Do you ever, ever get tired of being a hateful asshole? Of course you're the single biggest coward on this site, so I expect you'll avoid answering this, like you do to everyone else who calls out your BS.


The ignore button exists for a reason, and he is that reason.

Seriously, he starts out with the obvious troll-baiting of saying the bill isn't at all for what the damned bill is exactly for... he is a sad, lonely man who needs conflict to feel fulfilled. Pity him, ignore him, whatever... but do yourself the favor of not interacting with him... it doesn't go anywhere good.... it isn't like he's going to have meaningful discourse all of a sudden.
 
2012-06-29 10:49:09 PM  

The Homer Tax: skullkrusher: The Homer Tax: My "taxes" went up by exactly nothing yesterday. Why? Because I'm a grown-ass man and I already have insurance.

and you don't make enough to be hit with the non-mandate related tax increases in the bill ;)

Serious question: I might; what are the income specific tax raises in the bill? All I rember is nonsense like the tanning tax and the medical equipment tax.


These are the "hidden", indirect ones


Don't know if this is a complete list of the direct taxes in the bill but it covers the big one
 
2012-06-29 10:51:13 PM  

skullkrusher: The Homer Tax: skullkrusher: The Homer Tax: My "taxes" went up by exactly nothing yesterday. Why? Because I'm a grown-ass man and I already have insurance.

and you don't make enough to be hit with the non-mandate related tax increases in the bill ;)

Serious question: I might; what are the income specific tax raises in the bill? All I rember is nonsense like the tanning tax and the medical equipment tax.

These are the "hidden", indirect ones


Don't know if this is a complete list of the direct taxes in the bill but it covers the big one


the indirect ones can impact people across most income groups, the second link is mostly $200/$250k+
 
2012-06-29 10:51:37 PM  

skullkrusher: The Homer Tax: skullkrusher: The Homer Tax: My "taxes" went up by exactly nothing yesterday. Why? Because I'm a grown-ass man and I already have insurance.

and you don't make enough to be hit with the non-mandate related tax increases in the bill ;)

Serious question: I might; what are the income specific tax raises in the bill? All I rember is nonsense like the tanning tax and the medical equipment tax.

These are the "hidden", indirect ones


Don't know if this is a complete list of the direct taxes in the bill but it covers the big one


Wow, after reading that... it seems as though people making over 200k may pay an extra whole percent... and that (finally) this country's tax code is starting to realize that we were built on a foundation of hard work, so at the very least, we should give work and investment near equal footing when it comes to not robbing workers so we can continue to coddle investors.
 
2012-06-29 10:58:36 PM  

firefly212: Wow, after reading that... it seems as though people making over 200k may pay an extra whole percent


perhaps you should read it again?

firefly212: and that (finally) this country's tax code is starting to realize that we were built on a foundation of hard work, so at the very least, we should give work and investment near equal footing when it comes to not robbing workers so we can continue to coddle investors.


yeah, a married couple making $250k+ a year is the idle, investment class.
 
2012-06-29 11:09:29 PM  

skullkrusher: firefly212: Wow, after reading that... it seems as though people making over 200k may pay an extra whole percent

perhaps you should read it again?


Pardon, single people who actually work for a living and make over 200k will pay an extra 0.9%, married couples making over 250k will pay an extra 0.9%... oh noes, the sky is falling!

firefly212: and that (finally) this country's tax code is starting to realize that we were built on a foundation of hard work, so at the very least, we should give work and investment near equal footing when it comes to not robbing workers so we can continue to coddle investors.

yeah, a married couple making $250k+ a year is the idle, investment class.


Yes, the tax part that I was referring to was the investment income over 250k tax of an extra 3.9%... I would say that if you're making more than a quarter million a year from investment income, you may well be part of the investment class.
 
2012-06-29 11:10:21 PM  

Rent Party: Quasar: cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.

Is the new spin that those Wasacally Wepublicans are wanting to snatch the bread out of their mouth? Here's a news flash: They already had bread. For free.

You heard it, folks. The Emergency Room is officially "affordable health care."

I keep asking these retards to walk into an emergency room and ask for a prostate exam or cholesterol check and see how far they get.

People claiming the ER represents free health care are an extra special brand of stupid.


All the ER has to do is keep you from dying. Ask them to, for instance, refill your blood pressure meds and they'll tell you to see your regular doctor. If you're in the ER for out of control BP, they'll give you a week of meds and tell you to see your family doc.

If you don't have insurance, you can't get any more pills after that week, BP goes up again, back to the ER, etc, until you have a stroke or heart attack; or you manage to make it to 65 and your initial Medicare exam shows severe kidney disease secondary to uncontrolled hypertension.

USA!USA!USA!USA!

These heartless bastards need to spend 6 months without health insurance and see how much they like it.

I'd better stop before my blood pressure spikes and I end up in the ER. I have health insurance, though, so they're unlikely to push me out the door when I'm barely stable.
 
2012-06-29 11:15:29 PM  

firefly212: Pardon, single people who actually work for a living and make over 200k will pay an extra 0.9%, married couples making over 250k will pay an extra 0.9%... oh noes, the sky is falling!


no one has said the sky is falling. However, it a discussion of taxation so of course you'll have to act the fool.

firefly212: Yes, the tax part that I was referring to was the investment income over 250k tax of an extra 3.9%... I would say that if you're making more than a quarter million a year from investment income, you may well be part of the investment class.


maybe you'll read it a third time? You certainly don't seem to get it still.
 
2012-06-29 11:33:56 PM  

TV's Vinnie: They really ARE a gang of vile monsters who delight in the suffering of Humanity and plot for it's destruction.


If liberals really hated America as much as Republicans claim, they'd vote Republican.
 
2012-06-29 11:37:12 PM  
The best part of relec's troll is his mistaking mean actuarial data for real world circumstances, and then biatching that everyone else is being naiive.

Farking moran.
 
2012-06-29 11:49:25 PM  

404 page not found: mrshowrules: robsul82: Healthcare just ain't as sweet if poor people have it too. EVERYONE knows that.

When I can take my kids to the doctor and have them looked after, it warms my heart and makes me feel secure as a parent. When I know, my neighbour who was laid off can do the same thing for his children it sickens and disgusts me because it isn't fair.

I'm stealing this.


Fill your boots. I like Americans and I wish they could have a system like Canada's. Many of you deserve it.
 
2012-06-29 11:54:51 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: To console herself after she found out the truth, she went to the local childrens hospital and pulled the IVs out of poor kids arms. That brought a smile to her face.


She then punched a baby. But to be fair, the baby was being a dick.
 
2012-06-29 11:56:09 PM  

cchris_39: Where is this "denying millions of people affordable health care" bullshiat coming from?

I've been on Fark years and all I have been reading is that they are in fact already getting care and that "we are already paying for them" is the problem that has to be fixed.


They are getting some kinds of care, delivered in the least effective and highest-cost way possible - deny any kind of preventative medical care, deny treatment for long-term problems, and when those problems become life-threatening, use the most expensive medical resources to stabilize them and go back to ignoring them.

It's both higher cost AND lower quality compared to just giving them decent medical care to begin with.

Here's an analogy. Imagine you have a house with a pipe leaking a lot of water. You ignore the leak while it soaks the carpet and furniture. You ignore the leak as the drywall is damaged. You keep on ignoring the leak until the house is at risk of structural collapse, and then you fly in a crack team of emergency builders to conduct repairs, sparing no expense. And while you replace the carpet and the walls and repair the structure, you don't bother to stop the leak - you just go back to ignoring it as it soaks the carpet and furniture.

In that case, you're both drastically overspending AND drastically neglecting basic home care. You have a real problem, and you've found the worst possible solution to that problem.
 
2012-06-29 11:56:56 PM  

skullkrusher: firefly212: Pardon, single people who actually work for a living and make over 200k will pay an extra 0.9%, married couples making over 250k will pay an extra 0.9%... oh noes, the sky is falling!

no one has said the sky is falling. However, it a discussion of taxation so of course you'll have to act the fool.

firefly212: Yes, the tax part that I was referring to was the investment income over 250k tax of an extra 3.9%... I would say that if you're making more than a quarter million a year from investment income, you may well be part of the investment class.

maybe you'll read it a third time? You certainly don't seem to get it still.


FTFL: (should I bold it, so maybe you could read it this time?)
The additional 3.8% Medicare tax will not apply unless your adjusted gross income (AGI) exceeds: (1) $200,000 if you're unmarried, (2) $250,000 if you're a married joint-filer, or (3) $125,000 if you use married filing separate status.

The additional 3.8% Medicare tax will apply to the lesser of your net investment income or the amount of AGI in excess of the applicable threshold. Net investment income includes interest, dividends, royalties, annuities, rents, income from passive business activities, income from trading in financial instruments or commodities, and gains from assets held for investment like stock and other securities. (Gains from assets held for business purposes are not subject to the extra tax.)

Seriously, you keep yammering on without making a point... is this just a game to see how many replies you can get from me... because I have a very unimportant game of ARMA to tend to.
 
2012-06-30 12:08:10 AM  

firefly212: skullkrusher: firefly212: Pardon, single people who actually work for a living and make over 200k will pay an extra 0.9%, married couples making over 250k will pay an extra 0.9%... oh noes, the sky is falling!

no one has said the sky is falling. However, it a discussion of taxation so of course you'll have to act the fool.

firefly212: Yes, the tax part that I was referring to was the investment income over 250k tax of an extra 3.9%... I would say that if you're making more than a quarter million a year from investment income, you may well be part of the investment class.

maybe you'll read it a third time? You certainly don't seem to get it still.

FTFL: (should I bold it, so maybe you could read it this time?)
The additional 3.8% Medicare tax will not apply unless your adjusted gross income (AGI) exceeds: (1) $200,000 if you're unmarried, (2) $250,000 if you're a married joint-filer, or (3) $125,000 if you use married filing separate status.

The additional 3.8% Medicare tax will apply to the lesser of your net investment income or the amount of AGI in excess of the applicable threshold. Net investment income includes interest, dividends, royalties, annuities, rents, income from passive business activities, income from trading in financial instruments or commodities, and gains from assets held for investment like stock and other securities. (Gains from assets held for business purposes are not subject to the extra tax.)

Seriously, you keep yammering on without making a point... is this just a game to see how many replies you can get from me... because I have a very unimportant game of ARMA to tend to.


don't need to make $250,000 from investment income to be subject to the tax. Get it?
 
2012-06-30 12:34:06 AM  

skullkrusher: firefly212: skullkrusher: firefly212: Pardon, single people who actually work for a living and make over 200k will pay an extra 0.9%, married couples making over 250k will pay an extra 0.9%... oh noes, the sky is falling!

no one has said the sky is falling. However, it a discussion of taxation so of course you'll have to act the fool.

firefly212: Yes, the tax part that I was referring to was the investment income over 250k tax of an extra 3.9%... I would say that if you're making more than a quarter million a year from investment income, you may well be part of the investment class.

maybe you'll read it a third time? You certainly don't seem to get it still.

FTFL: (should I bold it, so maybe you could read it this time?)
The additional 3.8% Medicare tax will not apply unless your adjusted gross income (AGI) exceeds: (1) $200,000 if you're unmarried, (2) $250,000 if you're a married joint-filer, or (3) $125,000 if you use married filing separate status.

The additional 3.8% Medicare tax will apply to the lesser of your net investment income or the amount of AGI in excess of the applicable threshold. Net investment income includes interest, dividends, royalties, annuities, rents, income from passive business activities, income from trading in financial instruments or commodities, and gains from assets held for investment like stock and other securities. (Gains from assets held for business purposes are not subject to the extra tax.)

Seriously, you keep yammering on without making a point... is this just a game to see how many replies you can get from me... because I have a very unimportant game of ARMA to tend to.

don't need to make $250,000 from investment income to be subject to the tax. Get it?


I see where your hangup is... and I'm still not that worried, considering the 3.8 percent tax is only on the money made above the 250k mark... they pay a little extra from 250k-infinity... but if they make less than 250k, they don't take the hit at all... somehow that seems even more reasonable than I thought it was.
 
2012-06-30 12:36:44 AM  

firefly212: I see where your hangup is


I don't have a hangup about your inability to read and insistence on being haughty when corrected
 
2012-06-30 12:59:30 AM  

skullkrusher: firefly212: I see where your hangup is

I don't have a hangup about your inability to read and insistence on being haughty when corrected


First, I'd like to apologize... I misread the section of the 3.8 percent as being part of the context of investment income that preceded and followed it... I was wrong, and I apologize for my reticence.

Second, the tax rate for the first 250k doesn't change, and I'm not all that worried about people like Mitt Romney being forced to pay 18% instead of 14% when my tax rate (mostly because I have the audacity to *work* for my income) is over 27%. I think that, as before the ACA, rich people will continue to find creative ways to not pay for the system that enables them to be rich in the first place.
 
2012-06-30 01:01:50 AM  

firefly212: First, I'd like to apologize... I misread the section of the 3.8 percent as being part of the context of investment income that preceded and followed it... I was wrong, and I apologize for my reticence.


fine

firefly212: Second, the tax rate for the first 250k doesn't change, and I'm not all that worried about people like Mitt Romney being forced to pay 18% instead of 14% when my tax rate (mostly because I have the audacity to *work* for my income) is over 27%. I think that, as before the ACA, rich people will continue to find creative ways to not pay for the system that enables them to be rich in the first place.


point is that people like Mitt Romney don't start at $250k. They're quite a bit higher than that.
They need to pull more weight - not the people who already bear the brunt of our parabolic income tax scheme.
 
2012-06-30 01:35:59 AM  
www.eastsidedavecountry.com

RIP Mean Jean Schmidt
 
2012-06-30 01:38:21 AM  
Imagine her reaction to the ACA ruling.
 
2012-06-30 02:53:23 AM  

relcec: what's funny about subby's ridiculous take on this is striking down the individual mandate wasn't going to cost anyone their healthcare that got provided it for the first time through the ACA.

the mandate part wasn't necessary for the plan to survive. it was necessary to pad the insurance companies bottom line.
insurance companies just would have raised rates on current customers more to make up for the costs associated with prex folks and other additions that are now covered instead of relying on massive profits from the young and healthy that want no part of the overpriced dogshiat the insurance companies are selling.

what actually happened is the court ruled the federal government can't coerce the states into raising medicaid eligibility standards from the poverty limit ($18k or so for a family of 4) to $29k for a family of 4. a f*cking enormous amount of people without much money to speak of were going to be insured this way.

this is now dead. that's what the SCOTUS struck. many states won't expand medicaid. there are probably only half a dozen states right now that aren't facing severe budget problems at this moment.

this was literally the worst outcome imaginable, and it is telling that you are cheering for it. the people who were least able to afford it won't be insured. you're cheering for a ridiculous outcome subby. HCA's stock has gone up 20% in two days, people are going to be forced to become profit centers for the insurance companies, the rich are getting richer and the poor got f*cked again.


There is a good article that covers this (pre decision)

Link
 
2012-06-30 03:51:22 AM  
relcec

(farky'd as: You put the F*ck in WTF, you know 6226272, 7179273, 7167571, 7068464, 7061544, 7077917, and 7188773 is at long last good riddance because what the f*cking hell was in your mother's milk, battery acid!?)
 
2012-06-30 04:55:49 AM  

shamanwest: OH MY farkING GOD WHAT A GODDAMNED STUPID MOTHERfarkING coont WHORE MOTHERfarkING coont WHORE biatch


ThiS
 
2012-06-30 05:08:37 AM  
If you're a Republican in 2012, there's something fundamentally wrong with you. It's just that simple. Unless you're a millionaire. And even then...
 
2012-06-30 06:39:54 AM  

Kittypie070: relcec

(farky'd as: You put the F*ck in WTF, you know 6226272, 7179273, 7167571, 7068464, 7061544, 7077917, and 7188773 is at long last good riddance because what the f*cking hell was in your mother's milk, battery acid!?)


Down, kitty. He's not worth dulling your lovely white teeth and sharp pointy claws.
 
2012-06-30 06:56:13 AM  
Wish there were more video of her after she realized the truth...
 
2012-06-30 07:35:00 AM  
I'm convinced at this point that the Republican party has become a cult.

cult (noun):

1. A system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object.

2. A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister.

...

Certainly religious. In this case, it isn't a particular figure or object, but power, greed, bigotry, and hatred that they're devoted to.

Their behavior is both strange and sinister. I'm not convinced that their numbers are all that large (the crazy folks at the helm of the Republican party right now). Most of the moderates have been marginalized or alienated by the more extreme faction of their party.

While it was building up for quite a while, the major shift seemed to happen during the McCain/Palin campaign. They fed their crowds as much rhetorical red meat as they could muster and whipped them into a frenzy. Then when they lost, they found themselves having to cater to the angry mobs they had created. To placate those mobs, the party started taking far more extreme positions and ultimately became what we see today... the Republican Cult. A regressive, oppressive, bigoted, hateful, obstructionist cult that treats everyone who isn't a member as an enemy.

I don't foresee the moderates in their party steering it back into being a constructive and well meaning political party again... the brand is ruined for far too many. The best thing the disaffected moderates formerly of the Republican party could do for themselves and for the country is to form a new political party.

I'm a moderate... I've never been a Republican or a Democrat. As an independent, I would prefer if there was more than one viable*, reasonable, and rational choice on the ballot.

* There is currently no viable 3rd party running for President. By "viable" I mean they have at least halfway decent chance of winning.
 
2012-06-30 08:10:57 AM  

relcec: this was literally the worst outcome imaginable


Ha! Up till now I actually thought you were serious. You've crossed the Poe threshold, my friend.
 
2012-06-30 08:13:22 AM  

Dogberry: Aarontology: Isn't this the same lady who called a disabled veteran a coward on the floor of the House?

And serves a constituency whose median household income is $46,813, so you know, things are just fine for them.


Fun fact: That's twice my income, plus several thousand dollars.
 
2012-06-30 08:29:00 AM  

Churchy LaFemme: [i48.tinypic.com image 320x240]
She's got a face that just radiates love and compassion, amirite?? Like a sunny morning.


www.peteykins.com
 
2012-06-30 08:31:37 AM  

jchic: Been thinking about thinking about this. It's not that they don't care about the American people it's that American politics are no longer about governing the country. Politics has become basically a sporting event. The only thing that matters is if your side wins or loses. There are no repercussions. There is no thinking about "is this good or bad for the country". It's all wins and loses and if you win you get reelected and if you lose you might not. Plain and simple.

This is why you see the insane hyperbole take the place of rational discourse. Sad thing is that it's the citizens who lose no matter what.

 
2012-06-30 10:41:55 AM  

fringedmyotis: So, am I to infer from relcec's posts & the responses that catastrophic plans do not meet the minimum coverage requirements in the AHCA? Does anybody know what the thresholds are?


No. The only thing you should infer from relcec's posts is that he is mentally disturbed. Every single thing he said about the healthcare bill is wrong. Every. Single. Thing.

He's actively working to spread disinformation. He's lying more than Romney did in his speech yesterday, which is an amazing accomplishment.
 
2012-06-30 10:53:55 AM  
Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: Fwd: Fwd:

Ed, Watertown MA on June 29, 2012 10:57 AM:

To all the handwringing, all I can say is look to Massachusetts. We already have a working model of how this will play out.

1). After initial griping, and a few longer doctor's waiting room delays as previously uninsured people hookup with their new Primary Care Physician, both patients and Doctors will become supporters.

2). Less than 2% of people will decide that they would rather pay additional taxes than get covered by health insurance.

3). Insurers will come up with a variety of different and innovative insurance plans that they will offer through the exchanges. Almost everyone will find something that they can afford that will allow them to get at least a minimum level of coverage and avoid being forced into bankruptcy by a medical emergency.

4). After the first few years, savings will start to appear as people go to their Primary Care Physician for preventative care as opposed to going to Emergency rooms, forcing the taxpayers to pay for the most expensive type of medical care.

5). Those of us working as Independent Contractors and Entrepeneurs will finally be able to find affordable coverage on the exchanges. People will no longer feel forced to stay at a job they hate just to keep health coverage. Now they can take a chance on starting new businesses without fear that they are putting their family at risk. New startups in Massachusetts are among the highest in the nation.

6). I don't know if it will translate across the country, but Massachusetts since instituting "RomneyCare" has been growing faster than almost all other states. As of May, we are now down to 6% unemployment. Much better than the national average of 8.2%: http://lmi2.detma.org/Lmi/News_release_state.asp

7). Paying for all this has increased the state budget by only 1% which has since been more than offset by the increased tax revenues from more employed workers.

So my final word? Chill out and stop listening to the people with the dire predictions. They have an alternative agenda. They are not trying to do the right thing for America. They just want to win the next election no matter how much damage they do.



Take THAT gramps. And you too Mean Jean

Yes, it's an actual rational comment
 
2012-06-30 11:49:51 AM  
I've *never* been able to pay pre-tax money for over-the-counter drugs via Flex account or HSA.

That list is really hard to take seriously.
 
2012-06-30 12:09:44 PM  

DoctorCal: I've *never* been able to pay pre-tax money for over-the-counter drugs via Flex account or HSA.

That list is really hard to take seriously.


My biggest complaint about FSA's has always been the forfeiture of any unused funds placed in an FSA account.
That alone has prevented me from ever using an FSA.

I've never had the option of an HSA and I've worked for some damn large employers
 
2012-06-30 12:10:19 PM  

What a vile woman.

xtupload.com



'YEESSSSSSS!!!! Just think of how many sick children will die of easily preventable illnesses because they can't get healthcare. YESSS! THANK GOD!'
 
2012-06-30 12:14:59 PM  

X-boxershorts: My biggest complaint about FSA's has always been the forfeiture of any unused funds placed in an FSA account.
That alone has prevented me from ever using an FSA.

I've never had the option of an HSA and I've worked for some damn large employers


My biggest complaint about FSA/HSAs are that, while they save money for a subset of the population, they tend to increase total costs for the nation.
 
2012-06-30 12:39:24 PM  
Gyrfalcon 2012-06-30 06:39:54 AM


Kittypie070: relcec

(farky'd as: You put the F*ck in WTF, you know 6226272, 7179273, 7167571, 7068464, 7061544, 7077917, and 7188773 is at long last good riddance because what the f*cking hell was in your mother's milk, battery acid!?)

Down, kitty. He's not worth dulling your lovely white teeth and sharp pointy claws.


[tucks paws in smug, sneering manner]
 
2012-06-30 12:50:19 PM  

Goodfella: What a vile woman.


No, no, she just knows that Obamacare is bad for america and bad for the poor, and all those things Relcec said above.

And that's why you should keep voting Republican, because even though they've been blocking reform for two decades and didn't make any attempts at it when they had the full legislature and the presidency, they'll definitely get around to it now.

Haven't you heard Mitt's speeches? He'll repeal Obamacare and put in a place a system that will allow all americans affordable health care that is simple and prevents rising costs of medical care in the future. For Reals. He'll tell you the details, but not until 2013.
 
2012-06-30 02:09:28 PM  

Smackledorfer: Goodfella: What a vile woman.

No, no, she just knows that Obamacare is bad for america and bad for the poor, and all those things Relcec said above.

And that's why you should keep voting Republican, because even though they've been blocking reform for two decades and didn't make any attempts at it when they had the full legislature and the presidency, they'll definitely get around to it now.

Haven't you heard Mitt's speeches? He'll repeal Obamacare and put in a place a system that will allow all americans affordable health care that is simple and prevents rising costs of medical care in the future. For Reals. He'll tell you the details, but not until 2013.


After hearing Romney list all his individual reforms, I got the impression he intended to replace Obamacare with Romneycare
 
2012-06-30 02:11:35 PM  
Why do people stand outside of the Supreme Court when a decision is about to come down? What are they going to see or hear that the rest of us aren't?

I guess it's the ultimate rubbernecking.
 
2012-06-30 03:02:09 PM  

firefly212: jigger: relcec: this was literally the worst outcome imaginable, and it is telling that you are cheering for it. the people who were least able to afford it won't be insured. you're cheering for a ridiculous outcome subby. HCA's stock has gone up 20% in two days, people are going to be forced to become profit centers for the insurance companies, the rich are getting richer and the poor got f*cked again.

It really is bizarre watching Democrats and "progressives" cheering and celebrating over the upholding of a law literally written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies.

The law is a compromise in many ways... the part you don't seem to get is that to Democrats and Progressives, compromise isn't a dirty word.


The part you don't seem to get is the power that the federal government just claimed for itself. John Roberts just gave them unlimited power over the individual. Great compromise.
 
2012-06-30 03:06:43 PM  

djkutch: jigger: relcec: this was literally the worst outcome imaginable, and it is telling that you are cheering for it. the people who were least able to afford it won't be insured. you're cheering for a ridiculous outcome subby. HCA's stock has gone up 20% in two days, people are going to be forced to become profit centers for the insurance companies, the rich are getting richer and the poor got f*cked again.

It really is bizarre watching Democrats and "progressives" cheering and celebrating over the upholding of a law literally written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies.

So, what exactly is the Republicans' problem with what was originally the Republicans' plan? Shouldn't you be rejoicing in the streets? Aren't corporations not people and your friends?



Ah, yes. Criticize Democrats and you must be a Republican. Good thinkin skills!
 
2012-06-30 03:08:35 PM  

Sum Dum Gai: jigger: It really is bizarre watching Democrats and "progressives" cheering and celebrating over the upholding of a law literally written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies.

Because the insurance companies aren't going anywhere. You'd have to get rid of the most conservative four-fifths of Congress before you could propose something that would eliminate private insurance as the primary means of financing medical care.

GIVEN that no healthcare reform could have passed Congress except that which relied on private insurance, this was about as good as it could get. It's a step in the right direction anyway.


That has yet to be seen. Let's revisit this 10 years from now. Oh how the costs will explode. And you have less freedom. Congratulations.
 
2012-06-30 03:10:01 PM  

farkityfarker: Why do people stand outside of the Supreme Court when a decision is about to come down? What are they going to see or hear that the rest of us aren't?


Themselves on TV.
 
2012-06-30 03:10:30 PM  

farkityfarker: Why do people stand outside of the Supreme Court when a decision is about to come down? What are they going to see or hear that the rest of us aren't?

I guess it's the ultimate rubbernecking.


They get on TV.
 
2012-06-30 03:13:11 PM  

jigger: Sum Dum Gai: jigger: It really is bizarre watching Democrats and "progressives" cheering and celebrating over the upholding of a law literally written by the insurance companies for the insurance companies.

Because the insurance companies aren't going anywhere. You'd have to get rid of the most conservative four-fifths of Congress before you could propose something that would eliminate private insurance as the primary means of financing medical care.

GIVEN that no healthcare reform could have passed Congress except that which relied on private insurance, this was about as good as it could get. It's a step in the right direction anyway.

That has yet to be seen. Let's revisit this 10 years from now. Oh how the costs will explode. And you have less freedom. Congratulations.


One of these days we are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children, what it once was like in America when men were free.
 
2012-06-30 03:17:14 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: One of these days we are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children, what it once was like in America when men were free.


America has never been free.
 
2012-06-30 03:44:23 PM  

jigger: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: One of these days we are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children, what it once was like in America when men were free.

America has never been free.


I'll just post this again since you seem to only prefer the conservative talking points.

Ed, Watertown MA on June 29, 2012 10:57 AM:

To all the handwringing, all I can say is look to Massachusetts. We already have a working model of how this will play out.

1). After initial griping, and a few longer doctor's waiting room delays as previously uninsured people hookup with their new Primary Care Physician, both patients and Doctors will become supporters.

2). Less than 2% of people will decide that they would rather pay additional taxes than get covered by health insurance.

3). Insurers will come up with a variety of different and innovative insurance plans that they will offer through the exchanges. Almost everyone will find something that they can afford that will allow them to get at least a minimum level of coverage and avoid being forced into bankruptcy by a medical emergency.

4). After the first few years, savings will start to appear as people go to their Primary Care Physician for preventative care as opposed to going to Emergency rooms, forcing the taxpayers to pay for the most expensive type of medical care.

5). Those of us working as Independent Contractors and Entrepeneurs will finally be able to find affordable coverage on the exchanges. People will no longer feel forced to stay at a job they hate just to keep health coverage. Now they can take a chance on starting new businesses without fear that they are putting their family at risk. New startups in Massachusetts are among the highest in the nation.

6). I don't know if it will translate across the country, but Massachusetts since instituting "RomneyCare" has been growing faster than almost all other states. As of May, we are now down to 6% unemployment. Much better than the national average of 8.2%: http://lmi2.detma.org/Lmi/News_release_state.asp

7). Paying for all this has increased the state budget by only 1% which has since been more than offset by the increased tax revenues from more employed workers.

So my final word? Chill out and stop listening to the people with the dire predictions. They have an alternative agenda. They are not trying to do the right thing for America. They just want to win the next election no matter how much damage they do.
 
2012-06-30 03:47:03 PM  

jigger: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: One of these days we are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children, what it once was like in America when men were free.

America has never been free.


Then WTF are you worried about?
 
2012-06-30 04:10:05 PM  

X-boxershorts: After hearing Romney list all his individual reforms, I got the impression he intended to replace Obamacare with Romneycare


True... The only parts he wants to get rid of are the parts that actually pay for it.

Now that's some fiscal conservatism, right there.
 
2012-06-30 06:29:34 PM  

Sum Dum Gai: GIVEN that no healthcare reform could have passed Congress except that which relied on private insurance, this was about as good as it could get. It's a step in the right direction anyway.


I disagree. I see it as a setback because it has only more firmly entrenched us in the for-profit system.
 
2012-07-01 12:00:35 PM  
xtupload.com

♫ Jean reached for the secret too soon,
And now she's crying for the moon,
Shine on you derpy diamond! ♪

/Apologies to Pink Floyd
 
2012-07-01 01:19:17 PM  

jigger: Ah, yes. Criticize Democrats and you must be a Republican. Good thinkin skills!


Randroid is just Extra Strength Republican: all the derp, two times the crazy!
Case in point:

jigger: America has never been free.


Oh I know, you think you're different because you're "secular" or "socially libertarian" or whatever. But you're not. You just worship a different Goddess:

Link
 
Displayed 250 of 250 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report