Skip to content
 
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.

(Some Guy)   Here's your reminder that the government definitely has the power to give you affordable healthcare but they just chose not to   (virginiamercury.com) divider line
    More: Spiffy, Health insurance, United States Congress, Party leaders of the United States Senate, United States, United States women's national soccer team, Health care, Cap, United States Senate  
•       •       •

3284 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Mar 2020 at 3:45 AM (17 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-03-07 3:09:40 AM  
The money wasted in Iraq is all the reminder I need.
 
2020-03-07 3:50:39 AM  
FTA: The legislation prohibits Virginia insurers from setting a patient's cost-sharing payment for insulin above $50 a month - including deductibles and copays.

Way to not address the actual problem, which is the fact that a vial of insulin costs $300 in the US and $30 in Canada.  We need a nationwide collective purchasing program for pharmaceuticals, not a patchwork of laws that leave the underlying extortion in place but shift the cost around.
 
2020-03-07 3:55:39 AM  
The vague words "general welfare" mean any and everything is constitutional! Handouts for everyone!!
 
2020-03-07 3:57:46 AM  
Also anybody who objects to a nationwide collective purchasing program on the grounds of covering R&D expenses should be set on fire immediately.  What R&D expenses on insulin justify a 10x markup?  Why do you sell insulin in Canada at all if you're taking such a massive loss on every vial?  You're diverting that money to research boner pills and baldness cures, and of course to the yacht fund.  Mostly the yacht fund.
 
2020-03-07 3:59:42 AM  
Insulin costs around $3 a vial to make. If companies don't make a 2000% profit, society will collapse.
 
2020-03-07 4:00:56 AM  
Sad
 
2020-03-07 4:01:37 AM  

i ignore u: Also anybody who objects to a nationwide collective purchasing program on the grounds of covering R&D expenses should be set on fire immediately.  What R&D expenses on insulin justify a 10x markup?  Why do you sell insulin in Canada at all if you're taking such a massive loss on every vial?  You're diverting that money to research boner pills and baldness cures, and of course to the yacht fund.  Mostly the yacht fund.


The USA subsidises sales for the rest of the world. They can accept a tiny margin in Canada because they make such a huge margin in the USA. Given that I'm on the NHS and get any and all medicine for free...thanks, USA!
 
2020-03-07 4:04:59 AM  

i ignore u: FTA: The legislation prohibits Virginia insurers from setting a patient's cost-sharing payment for insulin above $50 a month - including deductibles and copays.

Way to not address the actual problem, which is the fact that a vial of insulin costs $300 in the US and $30 in Canada.  We need a nationwide collective purchasing program for pharmaceuticals, not a patchwork of laws that leave the underlying extortion in place but shift the cost around.


If onlya presidential candidate or two had been working on that.
 
2020-03-07 4:06:27 AM  

Catlenfell: Insulin costs around $3 a vial to make. If companies don't make a 2000% profit, society will collapse.


I'm sure there's some more cost involved in distribution, and retail markup is often like 30 or 40 percent above what they pay to the distributor to cover the cost of owning and operating a store, and there's some loss due to expired product, but let's call the actual cost to the pharmacy $10 or even $15 per vial.  $300/vial is still obscene.
 
2020-03-07 4:06:53 AM  

fusillade762: The money wasted in Iraq is all the reminder I need.


Or just the F-35 development budget.
 
2020-03-07 4:10:46 AM  

i ignore u: Catlenfell: Insulin costs around $3 a vial to make. If companies don't make a 2000% profit, society will collapse.

I'm sure there's some more cost involved in distribution, and retail markup is often like 30 or 40 percent above what they pay to the distributor to cover the cost of owning and operating a store, and there's some loss due to expired product, but let's call the actual cost to the pharmacy $10 or even $15 per vial.  $300/vial is still obscene.


One last thing.  It's also not fair to blame the retail pharmacies for this.  It's the manufacturers and distributors who are driving the price gouging.  If CVS jacks their prices I'll just go somewhere else, so the retail pharmacies don't have a lot of pricing power.
 
2020-03-07 4:11:51 AM  
See how fast shiat gets done when Democrats control a state?
 
2020-03-07 4:11:57 AM  

Shaggy_C: ... The USA subsidises sales for the rest of the world. They can accept a tiny margin in Canada because they make such a huge margin in the USA. Given that I'm on the NHS and get any and all medicine for free...thanks, USA!


The American drug companies make a profit in EVERY market.  They make a HUGE profit in America.
 
2020-03-07 4:12:43 AM  

Shaggy_C: i ignore u: Also anybody who objects to a nationwide collective purchasing program on the grounds of covering R&D expenses should be set on fire immediately.  What R&D expenses on insulin justify a 10x markup?  Why do you sell insulin in Canada at all if you're taking such a massive loss on every vial?  You're diverting that money to research boner pills and baldness cures, and of course to the yacht fund.  Mostly the yacht fund.

The USA subsidises sales for the rest of the world. They can accept a tiny margin in Canada because they make such a huge margin in the USA. Given that I'm on the NHS and get any and all medicine for free...thanks, USA!


Tired old bullshiat, sorry. Pharmaceutical companies in the US spend more on marketing their products than they do on R&D. Countries like Australia have banned pharmaceutical company marketing in most forms (ads are few and far between and can't mention product names, so you can see why they just don't bother) deliberately to keep costs reasonable.

The US does not subsidise sales for the rest of the world, it just blows up a shiatload of money which could be used for R&D or indeed shareholder profits in those ads about "side effects may include".
 
2020-03-07 4:14:46 AM  
medicare for all
 
2020-03-07 4:15:28 AM  
The US has proven for years it has the capacity for single payer health care. How? By having single payer health care. For veterans.

The DVA is single payer. Oh Noes! Soshulizim!
 
2020-03-07 4:16:56 AM  

Aussie_As: The US has proven for years it has the capacity for single payer health care. How? By having single payer health care. For veterans.

The DVA is single payer. Oh Noes! Soshulizim!


Isn't it also single provider?  Aren't veterans limited to government operated veteran-only clinics?
 
2020-03-07 4:17:31 AM  

Candy Colored Clown: See how fast shiat gets done when Democrats control a state?


Calling it shiat is a bit over the top.  It's better than nothing though.  =p
 
2020-03-07 4:18:10 AM  

Aussie_As: Shaggy_C: i ignore u: Also anybody who objects to a nationwide collective purchasing program on the grounds of covering R&D expenses should be set on fire immediately.  What R&D expenses on insulin justify a 10x markup?  Why do you sell insulin in Canada at all if you're taking such a massive loss on every vial?  You're diverting that money to research boner pills and baldness cures, and of course to the yacht fund.  Mostly the yacht fund.

The USA subsidises sales for the rest of the world. They can accept a tiny margin in Canada because they make such a huge margin in the USA. Given that I'm on the NHS and get any and all medicine for free...thanks, USA!

Tired old bullshiat, sorry. Pharmaceutical companies in the US spend more on marketing their products than they do on R&D. Countries like Australia have banned pharmaceutical company marketing in most forms (ads are few and far between and can't mention product names, so you can see why they just don't bother) deliberately to keep costs reasonable.

The US does not subsidise sales for the rest of the world, it just blows up a shiatload of money which could be used for R&D or indeed shareholder profits in those ads about "side effects may include".


Not to mention in many cases the US government is the one subsidizing the R&D.  Why shouldn't Americans benefit from that, costwise?
 
2020-03-07 4:20:08 AM  

fusillade762: The money wasted in Iraq is all the reminder I need.


Watch out. That's considered Putin talk on this here website. Don't you know HE benefits from America not constantly waging war-for-profit?
 
2020-03-07 4:20:25 AM  

MegaLib: medicare for all


I'm happy to settle for medicare for all that want it, and the right to import drugs from other countries.  Being able to order your insulin from Canada at Canadian prices will level out the price gouging in the USA.

Then when medicare is covering 70% of americans and it's working, move to medicare for all.

/am about to be called a filthy incrementalist.
 
2020-03-07 4:22:18 AM  
Shrug. Judging by Republicans' continued electoral victories in most of the country, Americans don't seem to want health care.
 
2020-03-07 4:24:51 AM  

Aussie_As: The US has proven for years it has the capacity for single payer health care. How? By having single payer health care. For veterans.

The DVA is single payer. Oh Noes! Soshulizim!


As a matter of fact, we have several different types of unrelated government run health care. Many of them are run through private agencies, so you have might have Washington state Medicaid administered by Blue Cross or something.

Medicare, Medicaid, and Tricare are what pop to my mind immediately. I can't see how this is possibly cheaper or more efficient than just giving everyone healthcare, but it does certainly make some people really rich while others die because they can't afford insulin.
 
2020-03-07 4:28:40 AM  

Candy Colored Clown: See how fast shiat gets done when Democrats control a state?


It's making these Rush Limbaugh, Fox News hilliblly heads spin, imma I'mma tell you what.  They gonna git in thur pickup trucks and hoverounds and protest in the holler!

Nah, they gonna take it, but they'll still listen to Rush and Fox News spin into something to make them hate it, like being some kind of nefarious giveaway to Black folks.  Yeah!  That's it!  (Cketus, what does "nefarious" mean?  I think it has somethin' to do with Egypt, Maw. DAMN DEMOCRATS)
 
2020-03-07 4:32:43 AM  

Norquist Vagprobe: Shrug. Judging by Republicans' continued electoral victories in most of the country, Americans don't seem to want health care.


Just because Republicans are uninterested in their constituents desires doesn't mean those desires don't exist.
 
2020-03-07 4:34:57 AM  

Likwit: fusillade762: The money wasted in Iraq is all the reminder I need.

Watch out. That's considered Putin talk on this here website. Don't you know HE benefits from America not constantly waging war-for-profit?


Putin benefits (massively) when the US goes to war, then farks off without a comprehensive exit strategy leaving a quagmire which Putin can pick winners out of.

Putin does not benefit by the US not starting wars in the first place.

But I suspect you pretend you don't get the difference because that farks up your agenda.
 
2020-03-07 4:35:09 AM  
$130 was the out of pocket cost for some basic antibiotics for an eye infection my 4 year old contracted.  My local CVS couldn't find me in their system and informed me what it was going to cost without insurance since I didn't have my RX card on me at that time.


Injections to boost stem cell production in my father in law so they could be harvested and reinjected back into him?  $10k.  A shot.


We as a country won't let ourselves have nice things.
 
2020-03-07 4:36:17 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Norquist Vagprobe: Shrug. Judging by Republicans' continued electoral victories in most of the country, Americans don't seem to want health care.

Just because Republicans are uninterested in their constituents desires doesn't mean those desires don't exist.


Look at all the "we're gonna repeal and replace" attempts that went nowhere legislaivey, because voting against health care is a problem in most red districts now.  The needle on this particular issue has moved.
 
2020-03-07 4:39:22 AM  

Nuc_E: $130 was the out of pocket cost for some basic antibiotics for an eye infection my 4 year old contracted.  My local CVS couldn't find me in their system and informed me what it was going to cost without insurance since I didn't have my RX card on me at that time.


Injections to boost stem cell production in my father in law so they could be harvested and reinjected back into him?  $10k.  A shot.


We as a country won't let ourselves have nice things.


I'll easier to justify a high price for the stem cell therapy because that's cutting edge stuff.  But antibiotics and insulin?  Really?
 
2020-03-07 4:40:07 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Norquist Vagprobe: Shrug. Judging by Republicans' continued electoral victories in most of the country, Americans don't seem to want health care.

Just because Republicans are uninterested in their constituents desires doesn't mean those desires don't exist.


Yeah, well, how strong can those desires be if people don't act on them? I'm just saying, piss or get off the pot.
 
2020-03-07 4:41:10 AM  

apocryphaandmyth: Dusk-You-n-Me: Norquist Vagprobe: Shrug. Judging by Republicans' continued electoral victories in most of the country, Americans don't seem to want health care.

Just because Republicans are uninterested in their constituents desires doesn't mean those desires don't exist.

Look at all the "we're gonna repeal and replace" attempts that went nowhere legislaivey, because voting against health care is a problem in most red districts now.  The needle on this particular issue has moved.


Maybe they're finally seeing the light of Jesus

The Light of Jesus
Youtube D4kJKtY8EnQ
 
2020-03-07 4:42:55 AM  

i ignore u: Nuc_E: $130 was the out of pocket cost for some basic antibiotics for an eye infection my 4 year old contracted.  My local CVS couldn't find me in their system and informed me what it was going to cost without insurance since I didn't have my RX card on me at that time.


Injections to boost stem cell production in my father in law so they could be harvested and reinjected back into him?  $10k.  A shot.


We as a country won't let ourselves have nice things.

I'll easier to justify a high price for the stem cell therapy because that's cutting edge stuff.  But antibiotics and insulin?  Really?


I'll, it's, same thing really.  I have the bigly best most beautiful words.
 
2020-03-07 4:45:43 AM  
SuperTramp:

Maybe they're finally seeing the light of Jesus


If that's what's up, I'll take it.

/Breakfast in America was a fantastic record
 
2020-03-07 4:47:47 AM  

i ignore u: Nuc_E: $130 was the out of pocket cost for some basic antibiotics for an eye infection my 4 year old contracted.  My local CVS couldn't find me in their system and informed me what it was going to cost without insurance since I didn't have my RX card on me at that time.


Injections to boost stem cell production in my father in law so they could be harvested and reinjected back into him?  $10k.  A shot.


We as a country won't let ourselves have nice things.

I'll easier to justify a high price for the stem cell therapy because that's cutting edge stuff.  But antibiotics and insulin?  Really?


He was given five injections, however, he only needed to take one.   Pretty certain his insurance was billed for all of them.
 
2020-03-07 4:48:33 AM  

Aussie_As: your agenda


I have no agenda. I do wish we'd stop spending $800B a year on wars that don't actually keep American citizens safe or advance our interests.
 
2020-03-07 4:55:27 AM  

Likwit: Aussie_As: your agenda

I have no agenda. I do wish we'd stop spending $800B a year on wars that don't actually keep American citizens safe or advance our interests.


But darling, think of the INVESTORS.
 
2020-03-07 4:55:58 AM  

Likwit: Aussie_As: your agenda

I have no agenda. I do wish we'd stop spending $800B a year on wars that don't actually keep American citizens safe or advance our interests.


Oh believe me, we all wish that. I can't believe Dick Cheney hasn't been executed for war crimes, let alone be walking around a free (and very wealthy) man.

But going to war equals responsibility to clean up the mess. You can't get out of it. And when you do, claiming "Oooh, we never knew it would be this expensive, bye!" that gives Putin a huge leg up.

But neither you nor Donald Trump can understand the difference between not going to war and farking off in the middle of hostilities because it hurts his and your agenda. Stop pretending otherwise. Nobody gets onto Fark biatching about "ooh, all I said was we should get out of expensive foreign wars and they had the temerity to point out that's exactly what Putin wants".
 
2020-03-07 4:58:04 AM  

Nuc_E: i ignore u: Nuc_E: $130 was the out of pocket cost for some basic antibiotics for an eye infection my 4 year old contracted.  My local CVS couldn't find me in their system and informed me what it was going to cost without insurance since I didn't have my RX card on me at that time.


Injections to boost stem cell production in my father in law so they could be harvested and reinjected back into him?  $10k.  A shot.


We as a country won't let ourselves have nice things.

I'll easier to justify a high price for the stem cell therapy because that's cutting edge stuff.  But antibiotics and insulin?  Really?

He was given five injections, however, he only needed to take one.   Pretty certain his insurance was billed for all of them.


If he was given injections that weren't medically necessary that's malpractice, and the insurance company would be all over it, refusing to pay, and suing over it.
 
2020-03-07 5:00:49 AM  

Shaggy_C: The vague words "general welfare" mean any and everything is constitutional! Handouts for everyone!!


*Laughs in Commerce Clause*
 
2020-03-07 5:02:29 AM  

Aussie_As: Likwit: Aussie_As: your agenda

I have no agenda. I do wish we'd stop spending $800B a year on wars that don't actually keep American citizens safe or advance our interests.

Oh believe me, we all wish that. I can't believe Dick Cheney hasn't been executed for war crimes, let alone be walking around a free (and very wealthy) man.

But going to war equals responsibility to clean up the mess. You can't get out of it. And when you do, claiming "Oooh, we never knew it would be this expensive, bye!" that gives Putin a huge leg up.

But neither you nor Donald Trump can understand the difference between not going to war and farking off in the middle of hostilities because it hurts his and your agenda. Stop pretending otherwise. Nobody gets onto Fark biatching about "ooh, all I said was we should get out of expensive foreign wars and they had the temerity to point out that's exactly what Putin wants".


So if Putin wants us to do something, we should never ever do it even if it benefits us? Good to know. I'll add 'getting out of unnecessary regime change wars' to the PolTab "list of things we can't do because our interests might accidentally align with Putin's."
 
2020-03-07 5:02:55 AM  

SuperTramp: Likwit: Aussie_As: your agenda

I have no agenda. I do wish we'd stop spending $800B a year on wars that don't actually keep American citizens safe or advance our interests.

But darling, think of the INVESTORS.


Dood... I wish everyday that I'd had the foresight to buy Raytheon in like 2004. fark.
 
2020-03-07 5:04:26 AM  

i ignore u: Nuc_E: i ignore u: Nuc_E: $130 was the out of pocket cost for some basic antibiotics for an eye infection my 4 year old contracted.  My local CVS couldn't find me in their system and informed me what it was going to cost without insurance since I didn't have my RX card on me at that time.


Injections to boost stem cell production in my father in law so they could be harvested and reinjected back into him?  $10k.  A shot.


We as a country won't let ourselves have nice things.

I'll easier to justify a high price for the stem cell therapy because that's cutting edge stuff.  But antibiotics and insulin?  Really?

He was given five injections, however, he only needed to take one.   Pretty certain his insurance was billed for all of them.

If he was given injections that weren't medically necessary that's malpractice, and the insurance company would be all over it, refusing to pay, and suing over it.


Surely, it's possible that it's more complicated than that? I mean, I can think of, off-hand, "as needed" and "take 1-2" as scenarios where this just doesn't even apply.
 
2020-03-07 5:11:53 AM  

Likwit: Aussie_As: Likwit: Aussie_As: your agenda

I have no agenda. I do wish we'd stop spending $800B a year on wars that don't actually keep American citizens safe or advance our interests.

Oh believe me, we all wish that. I can't believe Dick Cheney hasn't been executed for war crimes, let alone be walking around a free (and very wealthy) man.

But going to war equals responsibility to clean up the mess. You can't get out of it. And when you do, claiming "Oooh, we never knew it would be this expensive, bye!" that gives Putin a huge leg up.

But neither you nor Donald Trump can understand the difference between not going to war and farking off in the middle of hostilities because it hurts his and your agenda. Stop pretending otherwise. Nobody gets onto Fark biatching about "ooh, all I said was we should get out of expensive foreign wars and they had the temerity to point out that's exactly what Putin wants".

So if Putin wants us to do something, we should never ever do it even if it benefits us? Good to know. I'll add 'getting out of unnecessary regime change wars' to the PolTab "list of things we can't do because our interests might accidentally align with Putin's."


Ah, your story is changing. What was "not constantly waging war-for-profit"has become "getting out of unnecessary regime change wars".You tried to make these things the same, and now you've been called out on it your story is changing because those two things are not the same, which is all I had to say in the first place.

By your own words you are condemned. Trumpy.
 
2020-03-07 5:12:59 AM  

Aussie_As: Likwit: Aussie_As: Likwit: Aussie_As: your agenda

I have no agenda. I do wish we'd stop spending $800B a year on wars that don't actually keep American citizens safe or advance our interests.

Oh believe me, we all wish that. I can't believe Dick Cheney hasn't been executed for war crimes, let alone be walking around a free (and very wealthy) man.

But going to war equals responsibility to clean up the mess. You can't get out of it. And when you do, claiming "Oooh, we never knew it would be this expensive, bye!" that gives Putin a huge leg up.

But neither you nor Donald Trump can understand the difference between not going to war and farking off in the middle of hostilities because it hurts his and your agenda. Stop pretending otherwise. Nobody gets onto Fark biatching about "ooh, all I said was we should get out of expensive foreign wars and they had the temerity to point out that's exactly what Putin wants".

So if Putin wants us to do something, we should never ever do it even if it benefits us? Good to know. I'll add 'getting out of unnecessary regime change wars' to the PolTab "list of things we can't do because our interests might accidentally align with Putin's."

Ah, your story is changing. What was "not constantly waging war-for-profit"has become "getting out of unnecessary regime change wars".You tried to make these things the same, and now you've been called out on it your story is changing because those two things are not the same, which is all I had to say in the first place.

By your own words you are condemned. Trumpy.


You're a conspiracy theorist.
 
2020-03-07 5:14:52 AM  

JerryHeisenberg: You're a conspiracy theorist.


Okay, I'll bite, what conspiracy have I fallen for?
 
2020-03-07 5:19:17 AM  

Aussie_As: JerryHeisenberg: You're a conspiracy theorist.

Okay, I'll bite, what conspiracy have I fallen for?


You're positing a baseless theory that other farkers expressing commonplace Lefty opinions are Trumpers.
 
2020-03-07 5:20:46 AM  

Steampunk Gallagher: fusillade762: The money wasted in Iraq is all the reminder I need.

Or just the F-35 development budget.



Or one month of operating the USN John F. Kennedy coont9); except, "Muslins*! Terrorists! Terrorists! Muslins!"


quickmeme.comView Full Size


*  or as my student write it, "the Islams"
 
2020-03-07 5:28:17 AM  

JerryHeisenberg: Aussie_As: JerryHeisenberg: You're a conspiracy theorist.

Okay, I'll bite, what conspiracy have I fallen for?

You're positing a baseless theory that other farkers expressing commonplace Lefty opinions are Trumpers.


No, re-read, I never did that. I simply bagged out a spurious claim that Putin benefits from the US not starting wars, I corrected the farker who made that ludicrous claim that Putin benefits from the US (under Trump)  running away from wars it already started (under Bush) but that's not the same as what he said, despite his pathetic attempts to pretend otherwise after the event.

Why would anyone say that running away from a war (Trump) is the same as not starting one ("Lefty")? My "conspiracy" is they're a Trumper. But go on, give me the intellectually stable non-conspiratorial solution. Explain in detail enough for an idiot like me why it's fine to say that Trump running away from an established war thus benefiting Putin in the mid-east is the same as not starting the Iraq 2 war in the first place. (And it it's "because Putin could have sold Saddam a few more ex-Soviet tanks" I'll know you're a troll.)
 
2020-03-07 5:34:01 AM  

Aussie_As: JerryHeisenberg: Aussie_As: JerryHeisenberg: You're a conspiracy theorist.

Okay, I'll bite, what conspiracy have I fallen for?

You're positing a baseless theory that other farkers expressing commonplace Lefty opinions are Trumpers.

No, re-read, I never did that. I simply bagged out a spurious claim that Putin benefits from the US not starting wars, I corrected the farker who made that ludicrous claim that Putin benefits from the US (under Trump)  running away from wars it already started (under Bush) but that's not the same as what he said, despite his pathetic attempts to pretend otherwise after the event.

Why would anyone say that running away from a war (Trump) is the same as not starting one ("Lefty")? My "conspiracy" is they're a Trumper. But go on, give me the intellectually stable non-conspiratorial solution. Explain in detail enough for an idiot like me why it's fine to say that Trump running away from an established war thus benefiting Putin in the mid-east is the same as not starting the Iraq 2 war in the first place. (And it it's "because Putin could have sold Saddam a few more ex-Soviet tanks" I'll know you're a troll.)


But you're under the assumption that he would ever have agreed to your position here:
"But going to war equals responsibility to clean up the mess. You can't get out of it."
 
2020-03-07 5:36:40 AM  

Aussie_As: JerryHeisenberg: Aussie_As: JerryHeisenberg: You're a conspiracy theorist.

Okay, I'll bite, what conspiracy have I fallen for?

You're positing a baseless theory that other farkers expressing commonplace Lefty opinions are Trumpers.

No, re-read, I never did that. I simply bagged out a spurious claim that Putin benefits from the US not starting wars, I corrected the farker who made that ludicrous claim that Putin benefits from the US (under Trump)  running away from wars it already started (under Bush) but that's not the same as what he said, despite his pathetic attempts to pretend otherwise after the event.

Why would anyone say that running away from a war (Trump) is the same as not starting one ("Lefty")? My "conspiracy" is they're a Trumper. But go on, give me the intellectually stable non-conspiratorial solution. Explain in detail enough for an idiot like me why it's fine to say that Trump running away from an established war thus benefiting Putin in the mid-east is the same as not starting the Iraq 2 war in the first place. (And it it's "because Putin could have sold Saddam a few more ex-Soviet tanks" I'll know you're a troll.)


You also pivoted to an irrelevant point about Putin possibly benefiting from a position that he held as "evidence" as if it mattered, so he attacked it.
 
Displayed 50 of 121 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




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.