PDA

View Full Version : New Anti Obama Care Repub Outraged!



Gayle in MD
11-16-2010, 09:28 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Freshman Republican Congressman Andy Harris, who was elected on a promise to repeal the Affordable Care Act, is outraged that he's going to go a whole month before his government-provided health insurance kicks in:

A conservative Maryland physician elected to Congress on an anti-Obamacare platform surprised fellow freshmen at a Monday orientation session by demanding to know why his government-subsidized health care plan takes a month to kick in.
Republican Andy Harris, an anesthesiologist who defeated freshman Democrat Frank Kratovil on Maryland’s Eastern Shore, reacted incredulously when informed that federal law mandated that his government-subsidized health care policy would take effect on Feb. 1 – 28 days after his Jan. 3rd swearing-in.
“He stood up and asked the two ladies who were answering questions why it had to take so long, what he would do without 28 days of health care,” said a congressional staffer who saw the exchange. The benefits session, held behind closed doors, drew about 250 freshman members, staffers and family members to the Capitol Visitors Center auditorium late Monday morning.”
I think we finally have a working definition of a health insurance crisis--when a member of Congress has to go a whole month without coverage.</span></div></div>


http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/79197/health-reform-opponent-has-his-ox-gored

<span style="color: #CC0000">After millions spent bashing the new HCBill, in his campaign ads, as socialism, the guy has a melt down over his short waiting period to get his socialized Health Care! </span>

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

eg8r
11-16-2010, 09:48 AM
Tell the sucker to purchase Cobra. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

By the way, where is the video of this supposed "melt-down"? It looks like the guy asked a simple question.

Also, what does the link in your quote have to do with the subject of this post?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
11-16-2010, 09:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Tell the sucker to purchase Cobra. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

By the way, where is the video of this supposed "melt-down"? It looks like the guy asked a simple question.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Also, what does the link in your quote have to do with the subject of this post?</span>eg8r </div></div>

I see that you didn't' bother to read anything but the title, by your question, Ed.

Read the first paragraph, at least, before you ask me a ricidulous question, such as that.

G.

pooltchr
11-16-2010, 10:01 AM
I think the word "outraged" in the first paragraph of her post might be going a little bit overboard....but any excuse to slam a Republican is fine with her.

Steve

sack316
11-16-2010, 10:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“He stood up and asked the two ladies who were answering questions why it had to take so long, what he would do without 28 days of health care,” said a congressional staffer who saw the exchange. ... “Harris then asked if he could purchase insurance from the government to cover the gap,” added the aide. </div></div>

Sack

Gayle in MD
11-16-2010, 10:19 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“He stood up and asked the two ladies who were answering questions why it had to take so long, what he would do without 28 days of health care,” said a congressional staffer who saw the exchange. ... “Harris then asked if he could purchase insurance from the government to cover the gap,” added the aide. </div></div>

Sack </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Freshman Republican Congressman Andy Harris, who was elected on a promise to repeal the Affordable Care Act, is <span style='font-size: 11pt'>outraged</span> that he's going to go a whole month before his government-provided health insurance kicks in:

</div></div>

I think my title, conveys the quote from the authors piece, fairly...almost word for word.

sack316
11-16-2010, 10:32 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“He stood up and asked the two ladies who were answering questions why it had to take so long, what he would do without 28 days of health care,” said a congressional staffer who saw the exchange. ... “Harris then asked if he could purchase insurance from the government to cover the gap,” added the aide. </div></div>

Sack </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Freshman Republican Congressman Andy Harris, who was elected on a promise to repeal the Affordable Care Act, is <span style='font-size: 11pt'>outraged</span> that he's going to go a whole month before his government-provided health insurance kicks in:

</div></div>

I think my title, conveys the quote from the <u><span style='font-size: 14pt'>authors</span></u> piece, fairly...almost word for word.

</div></div>

Yes, it does.

Sack

eg8r
11-16-2010, 11:49 AM
But where exactly is the outrage? Your author appears to be grossly exaggerating.

eg8r

eg8r
11-16-2010, 12:00 PM
I read your quote and you did not answer the question, where is the proof of this supposed "melt-down"? Based on the quote you provided the man simply asked a question.

Why did you remove the link and not state it was a mistake or something else? Why was it even there?

I read your post and I commented on it first before I commented on the irrelevant link. The link you left in the actual quote had nothing to do with the subject and the only way for me to know that is if I actually went to it and read it, so quit making ridiculous statements about what I read when you want to go behind our backs and change your original post without telling us why. Here is the original link you removed from the post... http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/33318.html Why was it there?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">After millions spent bashing the new HCBill, in his campaign ads, as socialism, the guy has a melt down over his short waiting period to get his socialized Health Care! </div></div>This is a misnomer anyways. We all know the politicians do not get stuck with the same healthcare offered to the poor people. He is only asking for his employer to do what they said they would do.

Much like you he is acting pretty hypocritical I get it, but why do you chastise him but you ignore your own actions? You blast the Reps for wanting to make sure the rich keep their tax break breaks yet you take every deduction possible on your tax returns each year. Why aren't you making any posts about your own activity?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
11-16-2010, 12:38 PM
His employer is doing what is always done, so you're wrong about tha[b][b][b]There was only one highlighted link, Ed. It's still there. It is also the original.

Why would you use the accidental link, when it wasn't even highlighted.

Obviously, it was a mistake. I didn't address it because I was probably in the process of removing the mistaken link, from inside the quoted material, while you were going to all the trouble of cutting and pasting a link, that wasn't even highlighted.

Why are you such a nitpicker, when there was only one highlighted link, and it's still there. His employer, the U. S. government, was doing what it always done.

You've seen my tax records? Who do you think you are? I've never taken any blood money, never been on unemployment, never been on any welfare rolls, and never spent time working for an organization that makes weapons, and is involed in War contracting. Clean up your own house. Why aren't you making any posts about your own activities?

I suppose you are going to suggest you worked your way through college, by yourself, didn't have help from your parents, didn't take any loans, from anywhere, didn't live off your parents money, and have paid back every cent you got from all contributions and sources?

This is why I don't usually read your stuff. You can dish it out, but when do you ever own up to posting stuff on here that's not true, like your BS claims about Valarie Plame, being just a secretary, a colossal lie, which you still haven't owned up to at all.

I wasn't in the Senate when it happened, but more than one news organization, has reported it that way. The reporters usually have sources, aides, who they go out with, and buy drinks for, to get these stories.

Now if you'd like to dig up some information disproving his behavior, you're welcome to do so.

I am simply posting a news article, from a respected source. I didn't claim that the entire news source was demanding the guy resign, like Llotter did. I notice you didn't mind that.

The point, which you always go out of your way to obstruct, or twist to your liking, is this man harped and harped on socialized medicine, and couldn't wait to get his own socialized medicine, when he's loaded in the first place.

Do you think the money for his medical care doesn't come from the Government?



Wake up. Your pay comes from defense contracts, does it not? Who are you to question my personal finances?
G.

Deeman3
11-16-2010, 01:19 PM
Do you think the money for his medical care doesn't come from the government?

In point of fact, no, the money comes from the taxpayers and is distributed by the government. Nothing comes from the government except money from private and business taxes. This is not a simple case of syntax! The government only redistributes taxed and extorted money.

Gayle in MD
11-16-2010, 01:31 PM
Do you really thing yoou neede to explain that? Another nit picker.

Here, Nit pick this:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime
How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help Consumers

By Eliot Spitzer
Thursday, February 14, 2008; A25

Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers' ability to repay, making loans with deceptive "teaser" rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices, we noticed, were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.

Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose instead to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers.

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York's, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a resounding no.

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.

Let me explain: The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure federal agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence since the Civil War. Its mission is to ensure the fiscal soundness of national banks. For 140 years, the OCC examined the books of national banks to make sure they were balanced, an important but uncontroversial function. But a few years ago, for the first time in its history, the OCC was used as a tool against consumers.

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government's actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.

But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks. In fact, when my office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation.

Throughout our battles with the OCC and the banks, the mantra of the banks and their defenders was that efforts to curb predatory lending would deny access to credit to the very consumers the states were trying to protect. But the curbs we sought on predatory and unfair lending would have in no way jeopardized access to the legitimate credit market for appropriately priced loans. Instead, they would have stopped the scourge of predatory lending practices that have resulted in countless thousands of consumers losing their homes and put our economy in a precarious position.

When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers.

The writer is governor of New York.

</div></div>

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

eg8r
11-16-2010, 02:25 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">His employer is doing what is always done, so you're wrong about tha[b][b][b]There was only one highlighted link, Ed. It's still there. It is also the original.

Why would you use the accidental link, when it wasn't even highlighted.

</div></div>Highlighted or not, those of us that have been around the net for a while can recognize a URL and if it is not linked we know how to copy it into the address bar and see what it is about. I wonder how that mistake even happened? I looked at your original link and didn't see it there. Oversight?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why are you such a nitpicker, when there was only one highlighted link, and it's still there.</div></div>Again, if the link is highlighted (or active) or not is irrelavent. I just wanted to know why it was there. Then it was removed and you acted like it was never there in the first place so I had to go to my history to find it again.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You've seen my tax records? Who do you think you are? I've never taken any blood money, never been on unemployment, never been on any welfare rolls, and never spent time working for an organization that makes weapons, and is involed in War contracting.</div></div>What does any of this have to do with you chastising others for wanting a tax break yet you continue to take as many deductions as you can?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I suppose you are going to suggest you worked your way through college, by yourself, didn't have help from your parents, didn't take any loans, from anywhere, didn't live off your parents money, and have paid back every cent you got from all contributions and sources?

</div></div>Only the foolish go to college on loans. You are right, I did have help from my parents. I also worked two full time jobs. I left college with zero college loans. I had zero scholarships, zero loans. Just a bunch of hard work and help from my parents when I fell short.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You can dish it out, but when do you ever own up to posting stuff on here that's not true, like your BS claims about Valarie Plame, being just a secretary, a colossal lie, which you still haven't owned up to at all.

</div></div>You really are hard up for this secretary aren't you?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wasn't in the Senate when it happened, but more than one news organization, has reported it that way. The reporters usually have sources, aides, who they go out with, and buy drinks for, to get these stories.

</div></div>Then why aren't the reports of what actually happened stating things like this? They all keep saying the man stood up and asked a question. They aren't saying he was screaming, throwing chairs, nothing to lead a single thinking person to believe he was having a melt-down.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now if you'd like to dig up some information disproving his behavior, you're welcome to do so.

</div></div>There is no reason for me to do so. Your links prove it is the bias of the author having the melt-down, not the man asking a simple question.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am simply posting a news article, from a respected source. I didn't claim that the entire news source was demanding the guy resign, like Llotter did. I notice you didn't mind that.

</div></div>Why are you changing the subject? Did you see a post of mine to llotter telling him good job? Many times I just ignore his posts.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The point, which you always go out of your way to obstruct, or twist to your liking, is this man harped and harped on socialized medicine, and couldn't wait to get his own socialized medicine, when he's loaded in the first place.

</div></div>If that was your point then you might want to step back and rethink how you are going to successfully prove it. When an employer offers health benefits it is hardly socialized medicine. He will be earning that healthcare unlike the handouts he was railing against.

Also, the healthcare he will be receiving is much better than anything your pathetic Dems chose to offer the sick and poor of this country.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wake up. Your pay comes from defense contracts, does it not? Who are you to question my personal finances?
</div></div>I am not questioning your personal finances so the problem you are having is that of subject comprehension. My issue is with your hypocrisy denouncing tax cuts when every year you take advantage of them.

eg8r

eg8r
11-16-2010, 02:26 PM
Like myself you are talking into the wind. She completely ignores the fact that the government does not have its own money to hand out.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
11-16-2010, 06:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">His employer is doing what is always done, so you're wrong about tha[b][b]There was only one highlighted link, Ed. It's still there. It is also the original.

Why would you use the accidental link, when it wasn't even highlighted.

</div></div>Highlighted or not, those of us that have been around the net for a while can recognize a URL and if it is not linked we know how to copy it into the address bar and see what it is about. I wonder how that mistake even happened? I looked at your original link and didn't see it there. Oversight?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why are you such a nitpicker, when there was only one highlighted link, and it's still there.</div></div>Again, if the link is highlighted (or active) or not is irrelavent. I just wanted to know why it was there. Then it was removed and you acted like it was never there in the first place so I had to go to my history to find it again.

<span style="color: #CC0000">I didn't see it, didn't evven know what you were talking about. </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You've seen my tax records? Who do you think you are? I've never taken any blood money, never been on unemployment, never been on any welfare rolls, and never spent time working for an organization that makes weapons, and is involed in War contracting.</div></div>What does any of this have to do with you chastising others for wanting a tax break yet you continue to take as many deductions as you can?

<span style="color: #CC0000">Another lie, Ed. What would Jesus say? </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I suppose you are going to suggest you worked your way through college, by yourself, didn't have help from your parents, didn't take any loans, from anywhere, didn't live off your parents money, and have paid back every cent you got from all contributions and sources?

</div></div>Only the foolish go to college on loans. You are right, I did have help from my parents.

<span style="color: #CC0000">OIC, another Bushy, huh? Da Da paid your way.... </span>


I also worked two full time jobs. I left college with zero college loans. I had zero scholarships, zero loans. Just a bunch of hard work and help from my parents when I fell short.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You can dish it out, but when do you ever own up to posting stuff on here that's not true, like your BS claims about Valarie Plame, being just a secretary, a colossal lie, which you still haven't owned up to at all.

</div></div>You really are hard up for this secretary aren't you?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

<span style="color: #CC0000">You really can't admit your own errors, can you? CIA operations were put at risk, OTHER CIA AGENTS, exposed, and ruined, becuase he Bush Administration outed a CIA NOC Agent, AND Rove was the confirming source, and Libby was convicted of covering up for Cheney., FYI, that is treason, AND there is no statute of Limitations, for Treason. While you still deny the facts.</span>



I wasn't in the Senate when it happened, but more than one news organization, has reported it that way. The reporters usually have sources, aides, who they go out with, and buy drinks for, to get these stories.

</div></div>Then why aren't the reports of what actually happened stating things like this? They all keep saying the man stood up and asked a question. <span style="color: #CC0000">No, they do not. Other reports are far more specific.... and his behavior, was far more than just asking a question.</span> They aren't saying he was screaming, throwing chairs, nothing to lead a single thinking person to believe he was having a melt-down.

<span style="color: #CC0000">You don't have to scream, or throw chairs, to convey outrage, FYI.... </span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now if you'd like to dig up some information disproving his behavior, you're welcome to do so.

</div></div>There is no reason for me to do so. Your links prove it is the bias of the author having the melt-down, not the man asking a simple question.

<span style="color: #CC0000">LMAO! There was only one link, and if I really gave a damn about what you think abut any of this, I still wouldn't go out of my way for someone who refuses to admit to their own ridiculous assertions,</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am simply posting a news article, from a respected source. I didn't claim that the entire news source was demanding the guy resign, like Llotter did. I notice you didn't mind that.

</div></div>Why are you changing the subject? Did you see a post of mine to llotter telling him good job? Many times I just ignore his posts.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The point, which you always go out of your way to obstruct, or twist to your liking, is this man harped and harped on socialized medicine, and couldn't wait to get his own socialized medicine, when he's loaded in the first place.

</div></div>If that was your point then you might want to step back and rethink how you are going to successfully prove it.

<span style="color: #CC0000">Why would I bother proving anything to you? Facts have no impact on you anyway, which is why I keep you on ignore the vast majority of time, which is exactly where you are heading again, after a refresher on your nit picking, irrelevant, ridiculous, slanted version of reality.</span>


When an employer offers health benefits it is hardly socialized medicine. He will be earning that healthcare unlike the handouts he was railing against.

<span style="color: #CC0000">H was inquiring about whether he could buy in early, a public option, LMAO! </span>

http://WWW.politico.com

Also, the healthcare he will be receiving is much better than anything your pathetic Dems chose to offer the sick and poor of this country.


<span style="color: #CC0000">LMAO, yeah, right. </span>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wake up. Your pay comes from defense contracts, does it not? Who are you to question my personal finances?
</div></div>I am not questioning your personal finances so the problem you are having is that of subject comprehension. My issue is with your hypocrisy denouncing tax cuts when every year you take advantage of them.

eg8r </div></div>


[b]<span style="color: #CC0000">I have no problem with subject comprehension. I don't answer questions, from someone who refuses to answer question himself.

Do you and Deeman really think I'm that unaware that I think that after George Bush cleaned us out, the government has any money?

Not a chance....it's still a government check...Sherlock, and will be paid by China, like all of our other debts, since Bush ruined the country, dug our debt hole, walked out on two unpaid for wars, and lied for eight years, and is now lyng, and looking to make even more money off Americans, than he and Cheney already stole from all of us.... cleaned us out..., as he looked the other way for his Wall Street Pigs, who Bush, himself, called his base.



G.</span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

eg8r
11-16-2010, 07:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does any of this have to do with you chastising others for wanting a tax break yet you continue to take as many deductions as you can?



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Another lie, Ed. What would Jesus say?</div></div></div></div>Jesus would probably want to know what you thought was the lie.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">OIC, another Bushy, huh? Da Da paid your way....

</div></div>Absolutely not, that is what going to work is for. My parents helped cover my rent when I was out partying too much. Much like W, I drank too much during that time of my life.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You really can't admit your own errors, can you?</div></div>You are so out of touch with reality that you do not even notice how foolish I make you look every time you bring this subject up. Come on gayle, as far as this subject is concerned, get yourself a ladder and get over it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, they do not. Other reports are far more specific.... and his behavior, was far more than just asking a question.</div></div>Then why would you choose such a piss poor example to prove this pathetic point of yours? Why wouldn't you choose the one that said he was running around naked screaming at the top of his lungs about his medical coverage?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You don't have to scream, or throw chairs, to convey outrage, FYI....

</div></div>Yeah, well do all those example of expression overlap the same examples for melt-down or is your definition of what happened starting to change from melt-down to outrage? The two are not synonymous.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LMAO! There was only one link, and if I really gave a damn about what you think abut any of this, I still wouldn't go out of my way for someone who refuses to admit to their own ridiculous assertions,

</div></div>You do care because you know my opinion is being stated as the balance to your far out post and you want to try and sway people back to your point of view. Your proof just doesn't support it though. Go back to the drawing board.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why would I bother proving anything to you? </div></div>You said you were trying to make a point. I gave notice that the point made was poorly attempted and the next time you better step up your game. In this response alone you said there were other articles that better articulated what happened. Why wouldn't you choose those?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">H was inquiring about whether he could buy in early, a public option, LMAO!

</div></div>I surely did not see anywhere in the article where he preferred to buy into a public option. Why would he do that when there isn't one available?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also, the healthcare he will be receiving is much better than anything your pathetic Dems chose to offer the sick and poor of this country.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LMAO, yeah, right.</div></div></div></div>Yeah right what? Is that all the response you have? Is it because I am correct but you could never find it in your cold soul to admit it? Please show us where the bill says the poor of this country will be receiving the same medical care our politicians receive?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I don't answer questions, from someone who refuses to answer question himself.

</div></div>I didn't ask a question at this point of the post. I was merely pointing out that you have stumbled on the subject matter of your hypocrisy. You appear to still be stumped because now you are changing the subject once again.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you and Deeman really think I'm that unaware that I think that after George Bush cleaned us out, the government has any money?

</div></div>I do think you are naive enough to think Clinton's surplus meant we did even though our debt continually increased the whole time he was in office.

As far as your rant at the end, save your breath, all of those lies can easily be read in a million of your other posts.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
11-16-2010, 08:09 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What does any of this have to do with you chastising others for wanting a tax break yet you continue to take as many deductions as you can?



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Another lie, Ed. What would Jesus say?</div></div></div></div>Jesus would probably want to know what you thought was the lie.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">OIC, another Bushy, huh? Da Da paid your way....

</div></div>Absolutely not, that is what going to work is for. My parents helped cover my rent when I was out partying too much. Much like W, I drank too much during that time of my life.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You really can't admit your own errors, can you?</div></div>You are so out of touch with reality that you do not even notice how foolish I make you look every time you bring this subject up. Come on gayle, as far as this subject is concerned, get yourself a ladder and get over it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, they do not. Other reports are far more specific.... and his behavior, was far more than just asking a question.</div></div>Then why would you choose such a piss poor example to prove this pathetic point of yours? Why wouldn't you choose the one that said he was running around naked screaming at the top of his lungs about his medical coverage?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You don't have to scream, or throw chairs, to convey outrage, FYI....

</div></div>Yeah, well do all those example of expression overlap the same examples for melt-down or is your definition of what happened starting to change from melt-down to outrage? The two are not synonymous.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LMAO! There was only one link, and if I really gave a damn about what you think abut any of this, I still wouldn't go out of my way for someone who refuses to admit to their own ridiculous assertions,

</div></div>You do care because you know my opinion is being stated as the balance to your far out post and you want to try and sway people back to your point of view. Your proof just doesn't support it though. Go back to the drawing board.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why would I bother proving anything to you? </div></div>You said you were trying to make a point. I gave notice that the point made was poorly attempted and the next time you better step up your game. In this response alone you said there were other articles that better articulated what happened. Why wouldn't you choose those?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">H was inquiring about whether he could buy in early, a public option, LMAO!

</div></div>I surely did not see anywhere in the article where he preferred to buy into a public option. Why would he do that when there isn't one available?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also, the healthcare he will be receiving is much better than anything your pathetic Dems chose to offer the sick and poor of this country.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LMAO, yeah, right.</div></div></div></div>Yeah right what? Is that all the response you have? Is it because I am correct but you could never find it in your cold soul to admit it? Please show us where the bill says the poor of this country will be receiving the same medical care our politicians receive?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I don't answer questions, from someone who refuses to answer question himself.

</div></div>I didn't ask a question at this point of the post. I was merely pointing out that you have stumbled on the subject matter of your hypocrisy. You appear to still be stumped because now you are changing the subject once again.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you and Deeman really think I'm that unaware that I think that after George Bush cleaned us out, the government has any money?

</div></div>I do think you are naive enough to think Clinton's surplus meant we did even though our debt continually increased the whole time he was in office.

As far as your rant at the end, save your breath, all of those lies can easily be read in a million of your other posts.

eg8r </div></div>

<span style="color: #CC0000"> You are a total waste of time.

You're always so out of touch, it's never worth the trouble.

</span>

pooltchr
11-16-2010, 11:05 PM
She's finally gone off the deep end, Ed. At one time, she was just outrageous. Now she's either delusional, or just in complete denial.

She can't even put together a coherant post!

Steve

LWW
11-17-2010, 04:03 AM
YAWN

LWW