Brittney Griner

[azucena]

Dec 11, 2022 6:27:25 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 11, 2022 6:25:17 GMT -5 azucena said:

Dj - just wanted to let you know that I learn a lot from your postings. Sometimes I have to ask questions or research a bit mote to understand since I tend to tune out the news (top depressing and frustrating and fright for my mental health). Your posts keep me coming to check political so thank you.

az: that is perhaps the nicest thing anyone has said to me on the board.
thank YOU.

Aw, glad I took the time to respond as I've thought man that dj usually presents such great factual arguments that I can follow.

I don't think you and I have had much back and forth here so I guess I was a secret admirer now outted

I forget what time zone you're in, hoping it's eastern bc it's 530 central on a sundayband I'm only up due to insomnia.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 11, 2022 6:35:29 GMT -5 azucena said:

Dec 11, 2022 6:27:25 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

az: that is perhaps the nicest thing anyone has said to me on the board.
thank YOU.

Aw, glad I took the time to respond as I've thought man that dj usually presents such great factual arguments that I can follow.

I don't think you and I have had much back and forth here so I guess I was a secret admirer now outted [img src="https://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff155/JiminiChristmas/ymamsmiles/wink.png" src="//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png" class="smile" alt=""]

I forget what time zone you're in, hoping it's eastern bc it's 530 central on a sundayband I'm only up due to insomnia.

i am actually in Istanbul.  it is 2:30PM here.  just had breakfast. 

[azucena]

Ah, it crossed my mind that you were the instabul poster but I can't keep everyone straight. Keep sharing those stories too, I find them fascinating as they are so different from my own life. Glad to know you're not losing any sleep on YM like I am. It's a tame insomnia night, no anxiety just wide awake. I'm on the computer and got lots of personal emails sent and keep tacking on to my scheduled to do list. A long nap is in my future after church and lunch with a friend.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 11, 2022 6:41:05 GMT -5 azucena said:

Ah, it crossed my mind that you were the instabul poster but I can't keep everyone straight. Keep sharing those stories too, I find them fascinating as they are so different from my own life. Glad to know you're not losing any sleep on YM like I am. It's a tame insomnia night, no anxiety just wide awake. I'm on the computer and got lots of personal emails sent and keep tacking on to my scheduled to do list. A long nap is in my future after church and lunch with a friend.

i am here 3-6 months out of the year.  more often in California.

[tbop77]

Dec 10, 2022 14:00:58 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 10, 2022 9:56:41 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Fast and Furious started under W.
ISIS was not handled well.
and the ACA was the only meaningful healthcare reform since WW2.
i agree that it was flawed, but i don't agree that it was not worth doing.

As far as the aca the flawed system is an understatment. Taxing people because they don't want it is crap (one of the best things Trump did was end that). The high cost associated with it for the middle class was ridicilous. Our health ins went thru the roof when the ACA went into effect. The first year after Trump was in same insurance dropped to the lowest levels my company ever seen. 

The high price of health insurance started with a Republican President.  Can Republicans do math?  What did they think would happen if hospitals had to treat everyone, including illegals?  Do you think this bill signed into law by Reagan was flawed?  Those cost do not magically disappear.  Do you conclude that people without insurance should be turned away?  

As the Romney campaign debates itself about whether the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate is an evil tax or an unconstitutional penalty, it's worth remembering that Republican presidential icon Ronald Reagan imposed his own national healthcare mandate on the country. The mandate is well know today -- it requires emergency rooms to treat anyone in need, regardless of their ability to pay -- but the fact that Reagan signed it into law is often forgotten.

www.salon.com/2012/07/05/reagans_healthcare_mandate/

[djAdvocate]

Dec 11, 2022 8:43:39 GMT -5 tbop77 said:

Dec 10, 2022 14:00:58 GMT -5 scgal said:

As far as the aca the flawed system is an understatment. Taxing people because they don't want it is crap (one of the best things Trump did was end that). The high cost associated with it for the middle class was ridicilous. Our health ins went thru the roof when the ACA went into effect. The first year after Trump was in same insurance dropped to the lowest levels my company ever seen. 

The high price of health insurance started with a Republican President.  Can Republicans do math?  What did they think would happen if hospitals had to treat everyone, including illegals?  Do you think this bill signed into law by Reagan was flawed?  Those cost do not magically disappear.  Do you conclude that people without insurance should be turned away?  

As the Romney campaign debates itself about whether the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate is an evil tax or an unconstitutional penalty, it's worth remembering that Republican presidential icon Ronald Reagan imposed his own national healthcare mandate on the country. The mandate is well know today -- it requires emergency rooms to treat anyone in need, regardless of their ability to pay -- but the fact that Reagan signed it into law is often forgotten.

www.salon.com/2012/07/05/reagans_healthcare_mandate/

i pointed that out in post 170.

the thing about Reagan is that he PRIVATIZED the mandate, burdening EVERYONE that PAYS healthcare premiums.  this seems to me MONUMENTALLY UNFAIR, to have those that are taking responsibility for their healthcare pay the price for those that are not.  in fact, this seems 100% antithetical to everything that conservatives before and since stand for.

what Obama did was to have those that refused to enter that system pay for it rather than those who did so willingly.  and this was a vast improvement, imo.  much more equitable and sensible.  and the GOP went completely off the rails about it.  and Democrats refused to defend it on a rational basis.

[Opti]

Dec 11, 2022 9:49:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 11, 2022 8:43:39 GMT -5 tbop77 said:

The high price of health insurance started with a Republican President.  Can Republicans do math?  What did they think would happen if hospitals had to treat everyone, including illegals?  Do you think this bill signed into law by Reagan was flawed?  Those cost do not magically disappear.  Do you conclude that people without insurance should be turned away?  

As the Romney campaign debates itself about whether the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate is an evil tax or an unconstitutional penalty, it's worth remembering that Republican presidential icon Ronald Reagan imposed his own national healthcare mandate on the country. The mandate is well know today -- it requires emergency rooms to treat anyone in need, regardless of their ability to pay -- but the fact that Reagan signed it into law is often forgotten.

www.salon.com/2012/07/05/reagans_healthcare_mandate/

i pointed that out in post 170.

the thing about Reagan is that he PRIVATIZED the mandate, burdening EVERYONE that PAYS healthcare premiums.  this seems to me MONUMENTALLY UNFAIR, to have those that are taking responsibility for their healthcare pay the price for those that are not.  in fact, this seems 100% antithetical to everything that conservatives before and since stand for.

what Obama did was to have those that refused to enter that system pay for it rather than those who did so willingly.  and this was a vast improvement, imo.  much more equitable and sensible.  and the GOP went completely off the rails about it.  and Democrats refused to defend it on a rational basis.

Most of those who refuse to enter the system cannot afford to in the monetary sense. Its the same reason we have people driving without car insurance in states where it is mandated you must have car insurance in order to drive on public roads. 

[djAdvocate]

Dec 11, 2022 10:19:01 GMT -5 Opti said:

Dec 11, 2022 9:49:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i pointed that out in post 170.

the thing about Reagan is that he PRIVATIZED the mandate, burdening EVERYONE that PAYS healthcare premiums.  this seems to me MONUMENTALLY UNFAIR, to have those that are taking responsibility for their healthcare pay the price for those that are not.  in fact, this seems 100% antithetical to everything that conservatives before and since stand for.

what Obama did was to have those that refused to enter that system pay for it rather than those who did so willingly.  and this was a vast improvement, imo.  much more equitable and sensible.  and the GOP went completely off the rails about it.  and Democrats refused to defend it on a rational basis.

Most of those who refuse to enter the system cannot afford to in the monetary sense. Its the same reason we have people driving without car insurance in states where it is mandated you must have car insurance in order to drive on public roads. 

i have not seen any data to show that is true.  but it very well may be.

[scgal]

Dec 10, 2022 17:59:44 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Dec 10, 2022 17:46:54 GMT -5 dondub said:

There you have it ladies and gentlemen. Her Trump can free 5000 hardened Taliban terrorists…no problem. The ‘Other’ president trades FIVE for the confused American serviceman Bergdahl and he should “just go to the Taliban and work for them he’s no American”. Is your sense of reason really that corrupted that Trump gets a free pass for 1000 times more?

She can’t even criticize trumps call to suspend the constitution. She just said it was crazy and he misspoke. Because he is so outrageous he gets a pass.

If any democrat said what he said, there r we oils be a parade of republicans calling them Un-American and Fox News would be talking about it 23/7

Wrong again I did criticize him. I said he jumped off the cliff with that one. I don't agree with what he said I tried to figure out if he might have meant it another way but nope he is wrong and very stupid for saying it. You my friend are fixated on condemning me on anything I post that you don't even read what was written. 

[scgal]

Dec 11, 2022 9:49:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 11, 2022 8:43:39 GMT -5 tbop77 said:

The high price of health insurance started with a Republican President.  Can Republicans do math?  What did they think would happen if hospitals had to treat everyone, including illegals?  Do you think this bill signed into law by Reagan was flawed?  Those cost do not magically disappear.  Do you conclude that people without insurance should be turned away?  

As the Romney campaign debates itself about whether the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate is an evil tax or an unconstitutional penalty, it's worth remembering that Republican presidential icon Ronald Reagan imposed his own national healthcare mandate on the country. The mandate is well know today -- it requires emergency rooms to treat anyone in need, regardless of their ability to pay -- but the fact that Reagan signed it into law is often forgotten.

www.salon.com/2012/07/05/reagans_healthcare_mandate/

i pointed that out in post 170.

the thing about Reagan is that he PRIVATIZED the mandate, burdening EVERYONE that PAYS healthcare premiums.  this seems to me MONUMENTALLY UNFAIR, to have those that are taking responsibility for their healthcare pay the price for those that are not.  in fact, this seems 100% antithetical to everything that conservatives before and since stand for.

what Obama did was to have those that refused to enter that system pay for it rather than those who did so willingly.  and this was a vast improvement, imo.  much more equitable and sensible.  and the GOP went completely off the rails about it.  and Democrats refused to defend it on a rational basis.

But you shouldn't have to join something if you don't want it and be threatened to be penalized. This issue is under the assumption everyone wants to pay for health ins. I know people who pay cash granted they have the money to do so. What Reagan did was not the greatest but It spread the cost out across without a mandate which in my opinion is better. 

[Tennesseer]

Dec 9, 2022 1:38:02 GMT -5 ripvanwinkle said:

I'm mixed on this. I'm glad a she's is back home but but they still have another American citizen in jail. Would the administration have made the deal with the Russians if she was just a plain straight white female and not a black lesbian basketball player?

There are many Americans in jails around the world and we don't hear about them. I'm sure behind the scenes the State dept is working for their release but Grainer was found .702 grams of cannabis oil in her luggage. Did she think it was no big deal? And besides I'm a American! They will just release me. News flash. The Constitution and Bill of Rghts does not save you in foreign countries.

I think the State Dept folded their hand too soon.  

Saw this article title and immediately thought of Rip's comment above.

James Carville: Right-wing ire over Brittney Griner is because she 'is not white and is not straight'

[scgal]

Dec 10, 2022 16:38:42 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Dec 10, 2022 14:08:37 GMT -5 scgal said:

OMG he didn't release 5000 we didn't detain them. He was helping set up the peace talks. Talk about twisting the facts to fit your narrative. Nobody has been more terrorist friendly than Obama

The 5,000 would not have been released without trump's approval.

Had you not had your head so far up trump's ass you would have known that.

False narrative the US did not hold then no approval was necessary and they could have said no. Again Barrack Obama is the most terrorist friendly president. 

[Tennesseer]

Dec 11, 2022 11:46:53 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 10, 2022 16:38:42 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

The 5,000 would not have been released without trump's approval.

Had you not had your head so far up trump's ass you would have known that.

False narrative the US did not hold then no approval was necessary and they could have said no. Again Barrack Obama is the most terrorist friendly president. 

Congratulations. You give a new meaning to the expression 'Never Trump'.

[tallguy]

Dec 11, 2022 11:46:53 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 10, 2022 16:38:42 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

The 5,000 would not have been released without trump's approval.

Had you not had your head so far up trump's ass you would have known that.

False narrative the US did not hold then no approval was necessary and they could have said no. Again Barrack Obama is the most terrorist friendly president. 

What the f*** are you talking about?  Trump "negotiated" with the Taliban AGAINST the Afghani government and then likely pressured the Afghanis to go along after they initially refused.  

[Tennesseer]

Dec 11, 2022 11:55:37 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Dec 11, 2022 11:46:53 GMT -5 scgal said:

False narrative the US did not hold then no approval was necessary and they could have said no. Again Barrack Obama is the most terrorist friendly president. 

What the f*** are you talking about?  Trump "negotiated" with the Taliban AGAINST the Afghani government and then likely pressured the Afghanis to go along after they initially refused.  

I wonder if scgal will respond to the quoted material and linked articles below.

Dec 10, 2022 17:25:31 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Dec 10, 2022 16:42:52 GMT -5 tallguy said:

The Afghani government, which was left out of the "negotiations" completely, initially opposed the release knowing how bad it would be.  I would not be surprised to hear they were pressured into accepting it by the Trump administration.  

That would be correct.

For scgal

By September 2020, the Afghan government had freed about 5,000 Taliban prisoners after a request from the Trump administration. A government mediation team remained on standby to travel to Doha for talks with the Taliban, but delays persisted.[46]

US–Taliban deal

“Our agreement is with the Americans and we have asked them to ensure that their side of the agreement is implemented. They keep giving us various reasons for the delay. We are ready to talk as soon as the prisoner release is complete,” Wardak said, referring to the agreement signed in February.

Talks between the Afghan warring sides aimed at lasting peace are expected to begin in the Qatari capital following the completion of the prisoner swap agreed as part of the United States-Taliban deal signed in Doha.

The West-backed Afghan government has reluctantly released most of the 5,000 Taliban prisoners under pressure from the Trump administration, but is still holding some Taliban fighters who have serious charges against them.

Prisoner release issue continues to impede intra-Afghan talks

[tallguy]

Dec 11, 2022 11:59:06 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Dec 11, 2022 11:55:37 GMT -5 tallguy said:

What the f*** are you talking about?  Trump "negotiated" with the Taliban AGAINST the Afghani government and then likely pressured the Afghanis to go along after they initially refused.  

I wonder if scgal will respond to the quoted material and linked articles below.

Dec 10, 2022 17:25:31 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

That would be correct.

For scgal

US–Taliban deal


Prisoner release issue continues to impede intra-Afghan talks

Likely not with anything that could in any respect be considered intelligent and reasonable.  

[djAdvocate]

Dec 11, 2022 11:43:12 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 11, 2022 9:49:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i pointed that out in post 170.

the thing about Reagan is that he PRIVATIZED the mandate, burdening EVERYONE that PAYS healthcare premiums.  this seems to me MONUMENTALLY UNFAIR, to have those that are taking responsibility for their healthcare pay the price for those that are not.  in fact, this seems 100% antithetical to everything that conservatives before and since stand for.

what Obama did was to have those that refused to enter that system pay for it rather than those who did so willingly.  and this was a vast improvement, imo.  much more equitable and sensible.  and the GOP went completely off the rails about it.  and Democrats refused to defend it on a rational basis.

But you shouldn't have to join something if you don't want it and be threatened to be penalized. This issue is under the assumption everyone wants to pay for health ins. I know people who pay cash granted they have the money to do so. What Reagan did was not the greatest but It spread the cost out across without a mandate which in my opinion is better. 

even if i agreed with you (and i don't), this is clearly NOT the case for a great number of things.

for example, you cannot drive without no-fault insurance in the US.  
if you are conscripted, you can be arrested if you fail to show up.
taxes, taxes, taxes.

i think of those three, the car insurance one is the most relevant.

so, yeah, we all have to do things we don't want to do, under force of law.
the ACA is not really measurably different than MANY of those things.

[pulmonarymd]

Dec 11, 2022 11:43:12 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 11, 2022 9:49:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i pointed that out in post 170.

the thing about Reagan is that he PRIVATIZED the mandate, burdening EVERYONE that PAYS healthcare premiums.  this seems to me MONUMENTALLY UNFAIR, to have those that are taking responsibility for their healthcare pay the price for those that are not.  in fact, this seems 100% antithetical to everything that conservatives before and since stand for.

what Obama did was to have those that refused to enter that system pay for it rather than those who did so willingly.  and this was a vast improvement, imo.  much more equitable and sensible.  and the GOP went completely off the rails about it.  and Democrats refused to defend it on a rational basis.

But you shouldn't have to join something if you don't want it and be threatened to be penalized. This issue is under the assumption everyone wants to pay for health ins. I know people who pay cash granted they have the money to do so. What Reagan did was not the greatest but It spread the cost out across without a mandate which in my opinion is better. 

There is a mandate. Hospitals are required to care for anyone who shows up, regardless of ability to pay. They are required to do a screening exam, and provide necessary treatment to stabilize a problem, and are not allowed to transport anyone to another facility without providing this care, and documenting That the transfer is medically necessary. 

What DJ pointed out to you is that increases cost of care for everyone. If we are required to give unreimbursed care, somehow that needs to be recouped, or they will go out of business. What other industry has a requirement to give away there business? And I am the one with a problem with reading comprehension?

[pulmonarymd]

Dec 11, 2022 11:43:12 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 11, 2022 9:49:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i pointed that out in post 170.

the thing about Reagan is that he PRIVATIZED the mandate, burdening EVERYONE that PAYS healthcare premiums.  this seems to me MONUMENTALLY UNFAIR, to have those that are taking responsibility for their healthcare pay the price for those that are not.  in fact, this seems 100% antithetical to everything that conservatives before and since stand for.

what Obama did was to have those that refused to enter that system pay for it rather than those who did so willingly.  and this was a vast improvement, imo.  much more equitable and sensible.  and the GOP went completely off the rails about it.  and Democrats refused to defend it on a rational basis.

But you shouldn't have to join something if you don't want it and be threatened to be penalized. This issue is under the assumption everyone wants to pay for health ins. I know people who pay cash granted they have the money to do so. What Reagan did was not the greatest but It spread the cost out across without a mandate which in my opinion is better. 

Again wrong. You are ignoring the free loader issue. EMTALA allows people to get care, even if the will not be able to pay for it. It is not good care, but it still costs money. Costs which are paid by someone else. You refusal to understand this is unbelievable.

[dondub]

Dec 11, 2022 11:46:53 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 10, 2022 16:38:42 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

The 5,000 would not have been released without trump's approval.

Had you not had your head so far up trump's ass you would have known that.

False narrative the US did not hold then no approval was necessary and they could have said no. Again Barrack Obama is the most terrorist friendly president. 

Bullshiite.


Your only alleged proof was the 5 for 1 trade for the serviceman Bergdahl. My research indicated this was SOP for us to do dating back years.

Yet your Trump had 5000 hardened Taliban fighters released, in negotiations with the Taliban AGAINST our Allie’s the Afghani government, and you blithely overlook that.

The proof is in the pudding…by a large measure Trump was the most terrorist friendly potus ever. Not even close.

[weltschmerz]

Dec 11, 2022 9:49:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 11, 2022 8:43:39 GMT -5 tbop77 said:

The high price of health insurance started with a Republican President.  Can Republicans do math?  What did they think would happen if hospitals had to treat everyone, including illegals?  Do you think this bill signed into law by Reagan was flawed?  Those cost do not magically disappear.  Do you conclude that people without insurance should be turned away?  

As the Romney campaign debates itself about whether the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate is an evil tax or an unconstitutional penalty, it's worth remembering that Republican presidential icon Ronald Reagan imposed his own national healthcare mandate on the country. The mandate is well know today -- it requires emergency rooms to treat anyone in need, regardless of their ability to pay -- but the fact that Reagan signed it into law is often forgotten.

www.salon.com/2012/07/05/reagans_healthcare_mandate/

i pointed that out in post 170.

the thing about Reagan is that he PRIVATIZED the mandate, burdening EVERYONE that PAYS healthcare premiums.  this seems to me MONUMENTALLY UNFAIR, to have those that are taking responsibility for their healthcare pay the price for those that are not.  in fact, this seems 100% antithetical to everything that conservatives before and since stand for.

what Obama did was to have those that refused to enter that system pay for it rather than those who did so willingly.  and this was a vast improvement, imo.  much more equitable and sensible.  and the GOP went completely off the rails about it.  and Democrats refused to defend it on a rational basis.

So, I take it you're against single-payer/universal healthcare? Those who pay into it are paying the price for those who are not.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 11, 2022 14:02:53 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Dec 11, 2022 9:49:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i pointed that out in post 170.

the thing about Reagan is that he PRIVATIZED the mandate, burdening EVERYONE that PAYS healthcare premiums.  this seems to me MONUMENTALLY UNFAIR, to have those that are taking responsibility for their healthcare pay the price for those that are not.  in fact, this seems 100% antithetical to everything that conservatives before and since stand for.

what Obama did was to have those that refused to enter that system pay for it rather than those who did so willingly.  and this was a vast improvement, imo.  much more equitable and sensible.  and the GOP went completely off the rails about it.  and Democrats refused to defend it on a rational basis.

So, I take it you're against single-payer/universal healthcare? Those who pay into it are paying the price for those who are not.

in single payer, you pay into the system regardless of whether you use it or not.  you do so for (at least) two reasons, one of which is in case you DO need it.  in addition, ALL persons are protected under single payer, and pay a "flat rate", correct?  if so, then i am not really seeing the comparison from the perspective of one that has paid outrageous healthcare premiums to private carriers for decades.

[weltschmerz]

Yes, everyone is protected.   However, those who work like dogs get the same medical treatment as those who sit around on welfare.
That's why I made the comparison.

(Personally, I think everyone should be protected. We either all get healthcare or nobody gets healthcare.)

[pulmonarymd]

Dec 11, 2022 14:17:04 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Yes, everyone is protected.   However, those who work like dogs get the same medical treatment as those who sit around on welfare.
That's why I made the comparison.

(Personally, I think everyone should be protected. We either all get healthcare or nobody gets healthcare.)

That’s not what DJ said. The law he cites, EMTALA, is the worst of all worlds. It obligates the hospital to care for everyone, but provides no funding mechanism. So we have to see them and don’t get paid, the hospital eats the cost, raises prices on everyone, or cuts services. It is the farthest from universal healthcare that one can get.

From what he has written, I believe DJ is in favor of a single payer system, as being the fairest and most cost effective way to provide healthcare in a civilized society

[djAdvocate]

Dec 11, 2022 14:17:04 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Yes, everyone is protected.   However, those who work like dogs get the same medical treatment as those who sit around on welfare.
That's why I made the comparison.

(Personally, I think everyone should be protected. We either all get healthcare or nobody gets healthcare.)

i never said anything about whether the people were working or not, let alone whether they work like dogs or not.  that is an independent variable.

in the example i used earlier, my self employed friend with the back condition could not get insurance prior to the ACA.  he is an example of someone who worked like a dog and was not participating in the healthcare system even though he wanted to.

to answer your question succinctly, society is on a scale from takers to makers.  when you are a maker (like me) you have lots of options.  when you are a taker, you don't.  takers have it pretty bad, despite what makers like to say.  with all of our advantages, we can give a little to ensure that our kids don't get sick because of theirs.

[tbop77]

Dec 11, 2022 11:43:12 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 11, 2022 9:49:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i pointed that out in post 170.

the thing about Reagan is that he PRIVATIZED the mandate, burdening EVERYONE that PAYS healthcare premiums.  this seems to me MONUMENTALLY UNFAIR, to have those that are taking responsibility for their healthcare pay the price for those that are not.  in fact, this seems 100% antithetical to everything that conservatives before and since stand for.

what Obama did was to have those that refused to enter that system pay for it rather than those who did so willingly.  and this was a vast improvement, imo.  much more equitable and sensible.  and the GOP went completely off the rails about it.  and Democrats refused to defend it on a rational basis.

But you shouldn't have to join something if you don't want it and be threatened to be penalized. This issue is under the assumption everyone wants to pay for health ins. I know people who pay cash granted they have the money to do so. What Reagan did was not the greatest but It spread the cost out across without a mandate which in my opinion is better. 

Wrong again.  It was the largest unfunded mandate in US history.  If people don't want to join in and be penalized, why should I have to pay for their cost by the increases in my insurance?  He socialized health care and apparently the Republican party is too bad at math to understand that.  Heck, he was a bigger socialist that Obama!  

[pulmonarymd]

[djAdvocate]

Dec 11, 2022 14:56:57 GMT -5 tbop77 said:

Dec 11, 2022 11:43:12 GMT -5 scgal said:

But you shouldn't have to join something if you don't want it and be threatened to be penalized. This issue is under the assumption everyone wants to pay for health ins. I know people who pay cash granted they have the money to do so. What Reagan did was not the greatest but It spread the cost out across without a mandate which in my opinion is better. 

Wrong again.  It was the largest unfunded mandate in US history.  If people don't want to join in and be penalized, why should I have to pay for their cost by the increases in my insurance?  He socialized health care and apparently the Republican party is too bad at math to understand that.  Heck, he was a bigger socialist that Obama!  

actually, Obama was a great admirer of Reagan.  they have a LOT in common.  they have a similar "shining city on the mountain" outlook.  they were both supply siders.  they were both pro-intervention.  they were both sensitive about the issue of healthcare.  they were both good orators.  that is probably why they are both ranked in the top quartile by historians.

[mollyc]

Well this thread has wandered along a winding and twisty path.

On the original subject, I’m pretty sure based on years of news reports that the US government attempts to assist all of its citizens it feels have been unlawfully detained or with excessive punishment for the crime. That would be why it is negotiating for Paul Whelan and did for Brittney Griner. They were successful for one but not the other. As someone whose DH always tries to negotiate price at garage sales and the online marketplaces, I feel confident enough to say that sometimes the other party wants nothing you got and it becomes take it or leave it. Since neither person was causing Russia problems be being in their prisons, if they can’t get what they want, it’s no skin off their nose.

According to Whelan’s brother’s interview with CBC, Whelan is a citizen of the US, Canada, Britain and Ireland. Maybe Russia’s waiting for a bigger payoff than one arms dealer. Generally a change of govt doesn’t change the worker bees so I’d be surprised to learn the actual negotiators are different now then they were under Trump or Obama.

Thanks DJ for the comment about takers. As someone with a lot time working for accountants, I find it frustrating that “makers” breaking the spirit of laws and taking advantage of govt money are praised for being smart but an individual on welfare is lazy/evil. Anecdotes aren’t data but most of the people I’ve known on long term welfare had mental health/addiction issues. Most of others were single mothers whose partners split or gave in to their demons. As soon as they could, they got a job because the only thing welfare gives you is time. Time is great when you have babies or toddlers but doesn’t help much later. Anyone taking welfare because they’re lazy will probably work harder then if they had a job.

[scgal]

Dec 11, 2022 11:59:06 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Dec 11, 2022 11:55:37 GMT -5 tallguy said:

What the f*** are you talking about?  Trump "negotiated" with the Taliban AGAINST the Afghani government and then likely pressured the Afghanis to go along after they initially refused.  

I wonder if scgal will respond to the quoted material and linked articles below.

Dec 10, 2022 17:25:31 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

That would be correct.

For scgal

US–Taliban deal


Prisoner release issue continues to impede intra-Afghan talks

He is the only one that tried to get peace talks going with the backing of the UN. I still stand by not 1 prisoner was released from Trump they had to agree to it. If anything the way Biden pulled the rest of our troops out of Afghanistan was another disaster.