Political Chat Digest for bingster


User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 1:44 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
golfboy wrote:
Bad news for women that prefer risky abortions with no medical backup.

http://news.yahoo.com/court-reinstates-most-texas-abortion-rules-000638572.html
A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled that most of Texas' tough new abortion restrictions can take effect immediately — a decision that means a third of the state's clinics that perform the procedure won't be able to do so starting as soon as Friday.

A panel of judges at the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans said the law requiring doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital can take effect while a lawsuit challenging the restrictions moves forward. The panel issued the ruling three days after District Judge Lee Yeakel said the provision serves no medical purpose.

In its 20-page ruling, the appeals court panel acknowledged that the provision "may increase the cost of accessing an abortion provider and decrease the number of physicians available to perform abortions." However, the panel said that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that having "the incidental effect of making it more difficult or more expensive to procure an abortion cannot be enough to invalidate" a law that serves a valid purpose, "one not designed to strike at the right itself."


This is stupid. The "need" for admitting priveledges is nothing but a trap law to close down the clinics. The rub of the matter is that many of the hospital in clinic areas are religious and therefore wouldn't dream of allowing admitting priveledges to an abortion doctor.

The real "risky" abortions will happen now that dumb cons closed the clinics.

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 1:48 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
golfboy wrote:


Maddow and Screws are liars. The Administration admitted they knew that businesses would be affected by Obamacare too, not just the self insured, as though killing the insurance of 15 million people wasn't bad enough.


Obama Officials In 2010: 93 Million Americans Will Be Unable To Keep Their Health Plans Under Obamacare

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/10/31/obama-officials-in-2010-93-million-americans-will-be-unable-to-keep-their-health-plans-under-obamacare/

The admiinistration's commentary in the Federal Register did not only refer to the individual market, but also the market for employer-sponsored health insurance.


Section 1251 of the Affordable Care Act contains what’s called a “grandfather” provision that, in theory, allows people to keep their existing plans if they like them. But subsequent regulations from the Obama administration interpreted that provision so narrowly as to prevent most plans from gaining this protection.


“The Departments’ mid-range estimate is that 66 percent of small employer plans and 45 percent of large employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013,” wrote the administration on page 34552. All in all, more than half of employer-sponsored plans will lose their “grandfather status” and get canceled. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 156 million Americans—more than half the population—was covered by employer-sponsored insurance in 2013.


This still doesn't change the winners and losers ratio. most of those employer plans will be the same or better. Just stick to the KISS argument Golfboy and don't bother thinking at all.

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 1:54 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
golfboy wrote:
Even the New Yorker is now making fun of Obama.

Image


I just did an image search, the New Yorker has been outspoken during the Obama administration.

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 1:55 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
Pist0lPete wrote:
Image


That's a jackazz graph in a Republic. As long as you pay taxes, you are forced to buy products you may not want to buy. Quit being lame.

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 1:57 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
golfboy wrote:
Another poor liberal that is pissed off that the Senate is doing it's Constitutionally mandated job.
Do you think anyone Obama nominates should be automatically confirmed by the Senate?


Really? Where's the fillibuster in the Constitution?

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 2:45 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
TSA
, Airport, Airport Shooting LA, Assault Rifle, La Airport Shooting, Lax, Lax Evacuated, Lax Incident, Lax Shooting, Los Angeles Airport Shooting, Gun Violence,
Crime News
A gunman opened fire at LAX, killing a Transportation Security Administration agent and wounding several others at the airport, NBC News reports.
A suspect wearing camouflage and carrying a high-powered rifle was shot and secured by cops at about 9:30 a.m. local time, authorities told CBS. Chief of Airport Police Patrick Gannon said the "lone" shooter pulled an assault rifle out of a bag, went to a screening area and opened fire on TSA employees, then entered the airport and fired more shots.
"Officers tracked the individual through the airport and engaged him in gunfire in Terminal 3," Gannon said at a press conference.
He confirmed that multiple people were shot and transported to the hospital, and that the scene is safe. Fox News reports that the suspect is connected in some way to TSA.
"After the initial burst of gunfire and hiding, people started jumping over one another, jumping off chairs, pushing each other," Fox Sports reporter Bill Reiter said on Twitter. "Chaos & fear."
Live aerial footage of the scene previously showed hundreds of evacuated passengers crowded in and around the terminal. Emergency crews appeared to be working with patients on stretchers, and police armed with weapons swarmed the area.
"I heard popping and everybody dropped to the ground," evacuated passenger Robert Perez told CBS.
Tory Belleci of Discovery Channel's Mythbusters show was on his way to Philadelphia when the shooting occurred.
"I was in Terminal 3 when we heard the shots," he told HuffPost Crime. "At first it didn't register. Then, everybody started panicking and running. We ran toward terminal, but the gate was locked. We were trapped. It felt like an eternity ... We heard the shots coming from the elevator. One person near me said the shooting happened in the common area.
"A person told me he saw the shooter coming up the escalator. He was [allegedly] a white man in a white shirt."
Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said during a press conference that Terminals 4 through 8 are open and running at a slower pace. He urged those with afternoon flights out of LAX to reschedule, as the investigation is still ongoing.
LAX Shooting


1
of 16
ImageTwitter/

What do you cons have against the TSA?

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 2:49 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
The latest I've heard is that the man is NOT an off duty TSA guy, just a severely anti-government type. Sound like anyone we know?

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 2:50 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
White guy? Assault weapon? Anti-government? Tea Party!!!

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 2:51 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
It was knocked down once. It will be knocked down again.

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 2:53 pm

Post 01 Nov 2013, 2:53 pm
bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
Coochie's gon-na lo-ose! Coo-chie's gon-na lo-ose! Fking throwback to the fifties idiot!

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 3:10 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
RichClem wrote:
bingster wrote:
As long as you pay taxes, you are forced to buy products you may not want to buy. Quit being lame.


What other product does the federal government coerce you into buying?

Amazing how little regard the liberal-left has for Americans' freedom. :?


Oh, I don't know....bombs, planes, saran gas to ship to Sadam Heuisein, drones, etc...... And that's not counting the fact that your tax dollars subsidizes everything you don't agree with that government spends money on. The mere difference of making you buy it yourself, instead of the government spending that money seems inconsequential and you guys look ignorant trying to describe a difference.

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 3:42 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
No, actually, I heard it on KNX 1070. It's non-political.

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 3:43 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
cookie wrote:
jane81 wrote:
No, he's just a nutcase.


Yes, that's exactly what bingster said


Love your avatar!

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 3:45 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
bigsky wrote:


Yes, that's exactly what bingster said[/quote]

well...guess who has their head up obamas ass[/quote]

Is that you, Bigsky? I figured it was you with the ar15 in LA, this morning.

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 4:07 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
Hat_Creek wrote:
bingster wrote:
It was knocked down once. It will be knocked down again.


Words of a prideful baby killer.
Society has role reversal here.
Vietnam vets were spit upon when returning home, and called baby killers.
Now baby killers spit upon those who want to protect the unborn.
Hell is filled with liberals, a good place for em.


I actually do have respect for your side of the debate, but how far back do you go? Do you have a problem with invitro?

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 4:09 pm

bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
golfboy wrote:
bingster wrote:
Oh, I don't know....bombs, planes, saran gas to ship to Sadam Heuisein, drones, etc...... And that's not counting the fact that your tax dollars subsidizes everything you don't agree with that government spends money on. The mere difference of making you buy it yourself, instead of the government spending that money seems inconsequential and you guys look ignorant trying to describe a difference.


You evidently don't understand what is mean by the word "product".
When did the government force you to buy saran gas? They didn't.
When did the government force you to buy bombs? They didn't.
When did the government force you to buy planes? They didn't.

When did the government force you to buy healthcare insurance? Oct 1, 2013.
And it's not Rich looking ignorant trying to "describe a difference"...


No, it's not "product", it's who's actually handing the money to the seller. The govenment buys the gas with my money, or I buy the gas with my money. Same thing.

It's never forced me to buy insurance (unless you're counting the state government-which I think is a bigger point than you would admit). But, because it never did, is no excuse for not ever doing. Sounds like a child's excuse. "It never did, so it never can". Wah!

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 4:14 pm

Post 01 Nov 2013, 4:14 pm
bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
RichClem wrote:
The WashPost published a poll claiming that McCauliffe was up 12 points. No, that was never true. They're just trying to dispirit conservatives and boost his campaign.

But it might backfire. :D

Poll: McAuliffe 42, Cuccinelli 40...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/pol ... 65718.html


Now McCauliffe has to worry that his supporters will be complacent and not turn out. :lol:

DRAMA: McAuliffe Warns He Could Lose...
http://washingtonexaminer.com/as-cuccin ... le/2538282


Looks good for McAuliffe!




RCP Average
10/13 - 10/30
--
46.5
39.8
McAuliffe +6.7



Emerson College*
10/25 - 10/30
874 LV
42
40
McAuliffe +2



Christopher Newport Univ.*
10/25 - 10/30
1038 LV
45
38
McAuliffe +7



Rasmussen Reports*
10/28 - 10/29
1002 LV
43
36
McAuliffe +7



Quinnipiac
10/22 - 10/28
1182 LV
47
45
McAuliffe +2



Hampton University
10/24 - 10/27
800 LV
42
41
McAuliffe +1



Washington Post
10/24 - 10/27
762 LV
53
42
McAuliffe +11



Roanoke College*
10/21 - 10/27
838 LV
48
33
McAuliffe +15



NBC4/NBC News/Marist
10/13 - 10/15
596 LV
52
43
McAuliffe +9

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 4:16 pm

Post 01 Nov 2013, 4:16 pm
bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
bingster wrote:
The WashPost published a poll claiming that McCauliffe was up 12 points. No, that was never true. They're just trying to dispirit conservatives and boost his campaign.

But it might backfire. :D

Poll: McAuliffe 42, Cuccinelli 40...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/pol ... 65718.html


Now McCauliffe has to worry that his supporters will be complacent and not turn out. :lol:

DRAMA: McAuliffe Warns He Could Lose...
http://washingtonexaminer.com/as-cuccin ... le/2538282


Looks good for McAuliffe!




RCP Average
10/13 - 10/30
--
46.5
39.8
McAuliffe +6.7



Emerson College*
10/25 - 10/30
874 LV
42
40
McAuliffe +2



Christopher Newport Univ.*
10/25 - 10/30
1038 LV
45
38
McAuliffe +7



Rasmussen Reports*
10/28 - 10/29
1002 LV
43
36
McAuliffe +7



Quinnipiac
10/22 - 10/28
1182 LV
47
45
McAuliffe +2



Hampton University
10/24 - 10/27
800 LV
42
41
McAuliffe +1



Washington Post
10/24 - 10/27
762 LV
53
42
McAuliffe +11



Roanoke College*
10/21 - 10/27
838 LV
48
33
McAuliffe +15



NBC4/NBC News/Marist
10/13 - 10/15
596 LV
52
43
McAuliffe +9[/quote]

What were you saying about lying? Roanike up by 15. Washington post up by 11. NBC up by 9.

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 4:23 pm

Post 01 Nov 2013, 4:23 pm
bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
golfboy wrote:
:o Mother Jones breaking the bad news to the Obamatrons that think they are going to win in 2014

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/10/new-poll-shows-democratic-incumbents-big-trouble
Today brings a new poll from Democracy Corps titled
"Revolt against DC and the Republican Congress." And it's true: their polling shows that even in Republican districts, the GOP's brand has taken a beating.


But once you get past the generic questions and ask about approval/disapproval of
actual members of Congress, the picture turns sharply. I've combined two charts to show what happens when you ask people in battleground districts about their own representatives:


Image

In Democratic districts, net incumbent approval has plummeted by 11 points, from +8 approval to +3
disapproval. In Republican districts, incumbent approval has gone down only 4 points. You see the same results when they ask a question about warmth of feeling toward incumbents: It's down 7 points in Republican districts and 9 points in Democratic districts.


This isn't good news for Democrats. It's true that attitudes toward the Republican Party have taken a bigger hit than attitudes toward the Democratic Party, but attitudes toward actual incumbents are exactly the opposite. And in elections, that's what matters.




I've tried to explain this to many, many liberals and they don't seem to "get it".


Wow, got to hand it to you. You found the one and only article in the entire interwebs that says something positive about Republican chances in 2014. YOu must be very proud. Did you purposely cut out the post script?

"POSTSCRIPT: There's also a very weird result (on slide 20) showing that voters in Republican districts are more eager for their representatives to work with President Obama than voters in Democratic districts. I have no idea what to make of this. In fact, it's so strange that it makes me wonder if there's something wrong with this poll."

Yea, it does seem a bit strange.

User avatar
Posted by bingster
01 Nov 2013, 4:25 pm

Post 01 Nov 2013, 4:25 pm
bingster Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 17805
RichClem wrote:
golfboy wrote:
:o Mother Jones breaking the bad news to the Obamatrons that think they are going to win in 2014x


And to think, things will only get worse.

Imagine what Americans will think when they find out Obama intended to end most business-provided insurance, for 90 or so million Americans.

I've tried to explain this to many, many liberals and they don't seem to "get it".



Is there much of anything they do get? :lol:


Well, when you lie, and put it that way, it would be harmful. but he didn't intend to end anything. They saw the stats and knew there would be conversions. Nobody is going to flat out lose anything.