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.

(Huffington Post)   House GOP: "How about this, Debt Ceiling Lift for Obamacare delay?" Senate Dem: "No, revise it. Be serious." House GOP: "How about this, Debt Ceiling Lift for Obamacare delay?" USA:"fark you"   (huffingtonpost.com ) divider line
    More: Sad, House GOP, obamacare, GOP, Van Hollen, Majority Leader Harry Reid, individual mandate, ACA, Boehner  
•       •       •

2756 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Sep 2013 at 7:12 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-09-30 10:33:18 PM  

I_C_Weener: Infernalist: I_C_Weener: nmrsnr: Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.

Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?

I believe you're right.  If you can get a better deal through the exchanges, you can drop your employer supplied health care and pick up a private plan.

I hope so.  Someone's comment made me wonder though if the exchanges were only open to those without an employer option...good or bad.


It's for everyone, as I understand it.  Companies are simply required to provide that option to their employees, should they wish to make use of it.
 
2013-09-30 10:34:49 PM  

AurizenDarkstar: You're an RN, and you're suggesting that people should gamble with their lives by either not carrying insurance, or only carrying a catastrophic plan (just in case they get hit by a car or somehow get cancer).  I would suggest you find another line of work.


Some people can afford a high deductible catastrophic plan. Think of it as auto insurance, you don't get insurance for oil changes, and when somebody backs into you and takes off you don't report that $100 light to your insurance.

I have a different plan now (HDHP with HSA) so I don't get my own commercial plan but I still have a high dudectible, but for a young person the chances of getting cancer (hit by a car was covered under my state's mandatory PIP up to 10K) are pretty slim so in a risk-reward calculation it paid off well for me.

All insurance is a gamble, we want a low premium and in return we take less coverage. Look at the Bronze, Silver and Gold plans in Obamacare you'll see the same risk-reward method.
 
2013-09-30 10:35:11 PM  

feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.


I anticipate a lot of this as unintended consequences.  Though, I doubt we will know for sure the actual effect until it goes into effect fully.  No one really seems to have a full handle on what will happen.  it might work out to benefit all, but i suspect lots of employers and insurance companies changing tactics to lower costs.
 
2013-09-30 10:35:11 PM  

I_C_Weener: Infernalist: I_C_Weener: nmrsnr: Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.

Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?

I believe you're right.  If you can get a better deal through the exchanges, you can drop your employer supplied health care and pick up a private plan.

I hope so.  Someone's comment made me wonder though if the exchanges were only open to those without an employer option...good or bad.


Here's the details (from Kaiser Family Foundation):
"In general, employees who are offered insurance through work are not eligible for subsidized exchange coverage, so long as their insurance meets specified requirements. You would only be eligible for subsidized exchange coverage if your income is between 1 and 4 times the federal poverty level and you would have to pay more than 9.5% of your household income for your own coverage through the insurance offered by your employer."

Granted, that's subsidized rates. Not sure if you would be eligible for un-subsidized exchange rates.
 
2013-09-30 10:35:12 PM  

feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.


www.visi.com

So they are not exempt, and they are not special. Any other argument is not what we were talking about. I asked if hasty ambush honestly believed that they were exempt, and you came to his defense.
 
2013-09-30 10:37:30 PM  

feckingmorons: Insurance is a matter of acceptance and assignment of risk. The guy with the 10K deductible is retaining that risk, but paying someone else (the insurance company) to take the next $990000 of risk for him. Since most medical bills, even when added together, for the average 25 year old student won't reach 10K that is a pretty good risk for the insurance company to assume.


But you're still paying for the few who do get that cancer diagnosis or flown through a tornado.  And you as a nurse should know the value of preventative medicine.  When these people don't see the doctor, they could very well harboring problems that could be nipped in the bud on the cheap or pushed down the road to raise your costs.
 
2013-09-30 10:37:53 PM  

feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.


if that's actually true then subsidies should be raised so they can afford it but that might be a problem considering republicans/conservatives spent the whole last election talking about poor people getting "some skin in the game" and pay more. Is that suddenly not the case?
 
2013-09-30 10:38:01 PM  

I_C_Weener: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

I anticipate a lot of this as unintended consequences.  Though, I doubt we will know for sure the actual effect until it goes into effect fully.  No one really seems to have a full handle on what will happen.  it might work out to benefit all, but i suspect lots of employers and insurance companies changing tactics to lower costs.


This is exactly why it should be delayed. We don't need to implement it to see who gets screwed, we need to find out who will get screwed and then fix those problems. Obamacare is filled with unintended consequences, and none of them fark over the rich.
 
2013-09-30 10:39:01 PM  

feckingmorons: What about the 3000+ part time employees of Home Depot, that will be shunted from employer sponsored health care to the government exchanges? What happens to all the other people who have their hours slashed so the employer no longer has to offer them insurance? Trader Joes, Sea World, Forever 21 are all slashing hours.


Those employees are better off working for a company that aren't full of douchebags at HQ.
 
2013-09-30 10:40:04 PM  

nmrsnr: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

[www.visi.com image 500x75]

So they are not exempt, and they are not special. Any other argument is not what we were talking about. I asked if hasty ambush honestly believed that they were exempt, and you came to his defense.


Actually I responsed to you that they were 'exempt' in the sense that people with insurance through their employer are not required to use the exchanges.
/nor people on Medicare, VA health, people in Guam, lots of people don't have to use them.

Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?
 
2013-09-30 10:41:00 PM  

12349876: feckingmorons: What about the 3000+ part time employees of Home Depot, that will be shunted from employer sponsored health care to the government exchanges? What happens to all the other people who have their hours slashed so the employer no longer has to offer them insurance? Trader Joes, Sea World, Forever 21 are all slashing hours.

Those employees are better off working for a company that aren't full of douchebags at HQ.


Who is hiring these days? Sure, were all better off working for a firm that has great insurance, but service industries generally don't offer great insurance.
 
2013-09-30 10:41:42 PM  

Headso: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

if that's actually true then subsidies should be raised so they can afford it but that might be a problem considering republicans/conservatives spent the whole last election talking about poor people getting "some skin in the game" and pay more. Is that suddenly not the case?


Where exactly does the money for those subsidies come from?
 
2013-09-30 10:42:05 PM  

kidgenius: I_C_Weener: Infernalist: I_C_Weener: nmrsnr: Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.

Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?

I believe you're right.  If you can get a better deal through the exchanges, you can drop your employer supplied health care and pick up a private plan.

I hope so.  Someone's comment made me wonder though if the exchanges were only open to those without an employer option...good or bad.

Here's the details (from Kaiser Family Foundation):
"In general, employees who are offered insurance through work are not eligible for subsidized exchange coverage, so long as their insurance meets specified requirements. You would only be eligible for subsidized exchange coverage if your income is between 1 and 4 times the federal poverty level and you would have to pay more than 9.5% of your household income for your own coverage through the insurance offered by your employer."

Granted, that's subsidized rates. Not sure if you would be eligible for un-subsidized exchange rates.


Well, that screws me then.  Right now we pay roughly 15% of gross income for insurance (subsidized by employer).  But the employer plan is good, so it would likely meet the Obamacare minimums.  We can't shop around basically.  Though I'd also be limited to a small amount, if any exchange subsidy anyway.
 
2013-09-30 10:42:28 PM  

feckingmorons: nmrsnr: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

[www.visi.com image 500x75]

So they are not exempt, and they are not special. Any other argument is not what we were talking about. I asked if hasty ambush honestly believed that they were exempt, and you came to his defense.

Actually I responsed to you that they were 'exempt' in the sense that people with insurance through their employer are not required to use the exchanges.
/nor people on Medicare, VA health, people in Guam, lots of people don't have to use them.

Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?



I do.  The only states where the working poor will get the shaft are those states where the governors decided to turn down the Medicaid expansion, or in the case of a state like Florida or Georgia, where the state legislature has been doing their damnedest to screw with the law so less people have access to the exchanges.

Outside of that, I think quite a few people will be signing up for coverage.  Many who probably had NO access to any health insurance at any cost.
 
2013-09-30 10:43:36 PM  
hasty ambush:

img.fark.net

lwtc247.files.wordpress.com

Jesus Christ.
 
2013-09-30 10:44:06 PM  

feckingmorons: Come on.... you say I should be ashamed of myself and you don't reply when I refute your allegations with substance? I just hope you scrolled past it and this will prod you to reply.


That is sort of disappointing. I thought you would be one of the few to stand up for his assertions.
 
2013-09-30 10:44:29 PM  

feckingmorons: Headso: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

if that's actually true then subsidies should be raised so they can afford it but that might be a problem considering republicans/conservatives spent the whole last election talking about poor people getting "some skin in the game" and pay more. Is that suddenly not the case?

Where exactly does the money for those subsidies come from?


progressive taxation like other federally funded social services.
 
2013-09-30 10:44:39 PM  

feckingmorons: Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?


And so will the benefits.  This law isn't designed for the white collar folks who already have cadillac health plans nor the old and the destitute that already have Medicaid and Medicare.
 
2013-09-30 10:45:13 PM  

feckingmorons: AurizenDarkstar: You're an RN, and you're suggesting that people should gamble with their lives by either not carrying insurance, or only carrying a catastrophic plan (just in case they get hit by a car or somehow get cancer).  I would suggest you find another line of work.

Some people can afford a high deductible catastrophic plan. Think of it as auto insurance, you don't get insurance for oil changes, and when somebody backs into you and takes off you don't report that $100 light to your insurance.

I have a different plan now (HDHP with HSA) so I don't get my own commercial plan but I still have a high dudectible, but for a young person the chances of getting cancer (hit by a car was covered under my state's mandatory PIP up to 10K) are pretty slim so in a risk-reward calculation it paid off well for me.

All insurance is a gamble, we want a low premium and in return we take less coverage. Look at the Bronze, Silver and Gold plans in Obamacare you'll see the same risk-reward method.


HDHPs aren't necessarily bad, I had one through my previous employer, and while it was affordable and made me feel better knowing I wouldn't be bankrupted due to any accident or serious illness, there are also some drawbacks.

Mainly, knowing that I would be on the hook for the full cost of an office visit plus the full cost of any prescriptions made me very choosy about going to see the doctor.  Rash on my leg?  Buy some cortizone cream and hope it goes away on its own.  Pains the the chest/shoulder region?  Pop a bunch of Aleve and hope it's just muscle strain and goes away on its own.  Severe congestion and raspy breathing making it nearly impossible to sleep?  Try every OTC I could find for a week before I finally broke down and went in (only to be hit with $130 for the visit, $60 for an albuterol treatment, and $220 for a steroid inhaler the doctor insisted on instead of the $12 prednisone pack the guy before him had prescribed for the same issue the year before, which worked better than the expensive fancy stuff anyway).

So, lower average cost, but it does lead to unexpected bills when you do get sick, and at least for me it made me try to avoid going to the doctor whenever I could.  If I had flat $60 copays and prescription coverage, I would have been much more likely to go.  If we had universal single payer and I could walk in with no charge, there would be no hesitation at all.

Since a lot of things are cheaper and easier to treat if they're caught early, we should have a system that encourages people to go to the doctor, not one that encourages them to avoid it until they can't anymore.
 
2013-09-30 10:45:26 PM  

AurizenDarkstar: feckingmorons: nmrsnr: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

[www.visi.com image 500x75]

So they are not exempt, and they are not special. Any other argument is not what we were talking about. I asked if hasty ambush honestly believed that they were exempt, and you came to his defense.

Actually I responsed to you that they were 'exempt' in the sense that people with insurance through their employer are not required to use the exchanges.
/nor people on Medicare, VA health, people in Guam, lots of people don't have to use them.

Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?


I do.  The only states where the working poor will get the shaft are those states where the governors decided to turn down the Medicaid expansion, or in the case of a state like Florida or Georgia, where the state legislature has been doing their damnedest to screw with the law so less people have access to the exchanges.

Outside of that, I think quite a few people will be signing up for coverage.  Many who probably had NO access to any health insurance at any cost.


I disagree, but only time will tell. I would prefer nobody get screwed, but I'm afraid Obamacare won't help as many people as conventional wisdom seems to think it will and it will exacerbate the situations of the working poor.
 
2013-09-30 10:47:31 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: feckingmorons: AurizenDarkstar: You're an RN, and you're suggesting that people should gamble with their lives by either not carrying insurance, or only carrying a catastrophic plan (just in case they get hit by a car or somehow get cancer).  I would suggest you find another line of work.

Some people can afford a high deductible catastrophic plan. Think of it as auto insurance, you don't get insurance for oil changes, and when somebody backs into you and takes off you don't report that $100 light to your insurance.

I have a different plan now (HDHP with HSA) so I don't get my own commercial plan but I still have a high dudectible, but for a young person the chances of getting cancer (hit by a car was covered under my state's mandatory PIP up to 10K) are pretty slim so in a risk-reward calculation it paid off well for me.

All insurance is a gamble, we want a low premium and in return we take less coverage. Look at the Bronze, Silver and Gold plans in Obamacare you'll see the same risk-reward method.

HDHPs aren't necessarily bad, I had one through my previous employer, and while it was affordable and made me feel better knowing I wouldn't be bankrupted due to any accident or serious illness, there are also some drawbacks.

Mainly, knowing that I would be on the hook for the full cost of an office visit plus the full cost of any prescriptions made me very choosy about going to see the doctor.  Rash on my leg?  Buy some cortizone cream and hope it goes away on its own.  Pains the the chest/shoulder region?  Pop a bunch of Aleve and hope it's just muscle strain and goes away on its own.  Severe congestion and raspy breathing making it nearly impossible to sleep?  Try every OTC I could find for a week before I finally broke down and went in (only to be hit with $130 for the visit, $60 for an albuterol treatment, and $220 for a steroid inhaler the doctor insisted on instead of the $12 prednisone pack the guy before him had prescribed for the same issue the year before, ...


I bet the HDHP wasn't your only choice. I know in many states (and perhaps all) you must be offered an HMO or PPO in addition to any HDHP. Of course they cost a bit more, but then you only pay small co-payments at time of service.
 
2013-09-30 10:47:32 PM  

Headso: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

if that's actually true then subsidies should be raised so they can afford it but that might be a problem considering republicans/conservatives spent the whole last election talking about poor people getting "some skin in the game" and pay more. Is that suddenly not the case?


You would probably have to show proof that you don't have a refrigerator before you can qualify.
 
2013-09-30 10:48:14 PM  

12349876: feckingmorons: Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?

And so will the benefits.  This law isn't designed for the white collar folks who already have cadillac health plans nor the old and the destitute that already have Medicaid and Medicare.


But I do think there is a risk that many of the "middle class" with decent plans will lose those plans either because the employer drops them, or lowers their subsidssy of those plans...or the insurance company drops the benefits (at the same premium) to the bare minimum plan making anything else more attractive.  And the end result will be a worse plan from the exchange at the same or higher cost.

That is my guess on what will happen given the news stories of moving people to part time, and my experiences watching the smaller employers cut costs by dropping insurance altogether.
 
2013-09-30 10:48:37 PM  
I'm off to bed. Email your congressman and tell them they are morons, Republican, Democrats, even that one independent guy. Remind them who they work for, us not themselves.
 
2013-09-30 10:49:00 PM  
This conference thing is nutballs. What the frack is the GOP thinking?
 
2013-09-30 10:49:46 PM  

feckingmorons: Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?


Yes, because they will have subsidized insurance rates on the exchanges and should be getting more comprehensive coverage based on ACA requirements, and the 85% rule ensures the insurance companies are spending their money on clients health care costs. But all of that is beside the point. The point is that budget debates are NOT the appropriate time to bring up such changes, and these sorts of fine details are NOT what the Republicans are interested in debating. They are advocating wholesale repeal, and nothing else. If they were serious about making changes, they had 3 years to suggest tweaking the law in any number of ways, but they never did, they maintained from the beginning that "Obamacare" required nothing less than full "repeal and replace."

Now, as a last ditch effort, they art holding the functioning of the federal government as a bargaining chip, when it is supposed to be the desire of ALL parties to keep the government running in good order.
 
2013-09-30 10:50:42 PM  

DamnYankees: This conference thing is nutballs. What the frack is the GOP thinking?


My guess, eat up the clock so that they can send it back to the Senate one last time and then go home.
 
2013-09-30 10:52:11 PM  

nmrsnr: when it is supposed to be the desire of ALL parties to keep the government running in good order.


Yeah, well they don't care about us, any of them. All they care about is themselves. Piss on them, vote all of them out and get a new crop in 2014.

/OK now I'm going to bed.
 
2013-09-30 10:54:10 PM  

Infernalist: DamnYankees: This conference thing is nutballs. What the frack is the GOP thinking?

My guess, eat up the clock so that they can send it back to the Senate one last time and then go home.


They aren't sending anything back. That's the point. They are done. They are just appointing conferees. I'm reading that they are doing this so they can say "hey, look, we are sending conferees to agree on a budget because Harry Reid is being so unreasonable." Of course, Reid has literally been trying to send Senate conferees for MONTHS, but the GOP won't let him do it since it needs 60 votes.
 
2013-09-30 10:56:21 PM  
imageshack.us
 
2013-09-30 10:57:47 PM  

DamnYankees: Infernalist: DamnYankees: This conference thing is nutballs. What the frack is the GOP thinking?

My guess, eat up the clock so that they can send it back to the Senate one last time and then go home.

They aren't sending anything back. That's the point. They are done. They are just appointing conferees. I'm reading that they are doing this so they can say "hey, look, we are sending conferees to agree on a budget because Harry Reid is being so unreasonable." Of course, Reid has literally been trying to send Senate conferees for MONTHS, but the GOP won't let him do it since it needs 60 votes.


So, just setting up spin for tomorrow.  I guess we're headed for a shut down.  Sorry to all those that get hurt by this.  You can thank the GOP for being jackholes as per usual.
 
2013-09-30 10:58:00 PM  

DamnYankees: This conference thing is nutballs. What the frack is the GOP thinking?


I can see the basis for your confusion lies in the above highlighted false premise.
 
2013-09-30 10:58:35 PM  

Infernalist: So, just setting up spin for tomorrow.  I guess we're headed for a shut down.  Sorry to all those that get hurt by this.  You can thank the GOP for being jackholes as per usual.


Yes, by doing this the GOP has decided they would rather shut the government down than pass a clean CR. That's really what this means.
 
2013-09-30 11:01:58 PM  
Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?
 
2013-09-30 11:02:03 PM  
Reid announces on the Senate floor he is rejecting a conference on the CR. He's happy to go to conference (Dems have been trying to go to conference for months, the GOP has been filibustering), but he won't do it with a gun to his head on the CR.
 
2013-09-30 11:02:58 PM  

SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?


Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?
 
2013-09-30 11:04:32 PM  

Carn: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

feckingmorons, I demand you pay for TF for me for 1 year.


Not a good analogy. You forgot to threaten something that both of you should want.
 
2013-09-30 11:04:42 PM  

SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?


I think we covered this several thousand posts ago.
 
2013-09-30 11:05:37 PM  

Uranus Is Huge!: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?


Civil disagreements aren't your strong suit I see.
 
2013-09-30 11:06:19 PM  

Mugato: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

I think we covered this several thousand posts ago.


Sorry, I was working most of the day and just now got to seeing Fark.  :-)
 
2013-09-30 11:06:25 PM  

SithLord: Uranus Is Huge!: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?

Civil disagreements aren't your strong suit I see.


How so?
 
2013-09-30 11:12:49 PM  

SithLord: Uranus Is Huge!: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?

Civil disagreements aren't your strong suit I see.


Your disingenuous question didn't deserve a civil answer.
 
2013-09-30 11:14:33 PM  

SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?


Here's the short version: What are the Democrats receiving for their capitulation? Generally negotiation involves give and take. A functioning government is something BOTH parties should want, so that's not something given by Republicans. What the Democrats have is already law, so how is this "compromise" and not "extortion?"
 
2013-09-30 11:15:27 PM  

feckingmorons: You can have your own opinion. You can't have your own facts.


www.sundriesshack.com
 
2013-09-30 11:15:44 PM  

vrax: SithLord: Uranus Is Huge!: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?

Civil disagreements aren't your strong suit I see.

Your disingenuous question didn't deserve a civil answer.


Add rhetorical devices to the LOTCATGOPATA.
 
2013-09-30 11:18:38 PM  

feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.


You caring about the poor is like Kim Jong-un caring about the sick and hungry in North Korea.
 
2013-09-30 11:20:10 PM  

Uranus Is Huge!: vrax: SithLord: Uranus Is Huge!: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?

Civil disagreements aren't your strong suit I see.

Your disingenuous question didn't deserve a civil answer.

Add rhetorical devices to the LOTCATGOPATA.


Guess so!

And he still didn't answer the question.  Fishy!
 
2013-09-30 11:40:13 PM  
HEALTHCARE IS NOT GOING TO BE FREE. NOONE EXPECTS IT TO BE FREE AND IT IS NOT REASONABLE TO EXPECT IT TO BE FREE.
 
2013-09-30 11:40:47 PM  

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


They made demands and offered up nothing in return.  There is nothing to compromise on...
 
2013-10-01 12:06:44 AM  

shadow9d9: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

They made demands and offered up nothing in return.  There is nothing to compromise on...


Acording to Republicans, "Allowing the government to continue to function" is a compromise, and is in no way similar to a lunatic holding someone hostage.
 
Displayed 50 of 407 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all


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