Money for All Users


TheNightStalker's Photo
Posted by TheNightStalker
15 Jan 2014, 9:40 pm

Post 15 Jan 2014, 9:40 pm

Posts: 598
He called out TheNightStalker. He will pay the ultimate price.
3

User avatar
Posted by Candy
15 Jan 2014, 7:33 pm

Candy   
User avatar
  

Posts: 70
From Wikipedia -

The public health insurance option , also known as the public insurance option or the public option, was a proposal to create a government-run health insurance agency which would compete with other health insurance companies within the United States. The public option is not the same as publicly funded health care, but was proposed as an alternative health insurance plan offered by the government. The proposal was initially part of the debates surrounding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, but was not passed in the final reconciled bill.

I believe 'The Public Option' would have made good positive changes to the industry and eventually benefited American citizens. BCBS has had a monopoly in my state and many others, for years now.
2

User avatar
Posted by Nubber
15 Jan 2014, 10:46 pm

Nubber Fluffy Bunny O.G.!
User avatar
Fluffy Bunny O.G.!

Posts: 965
PoliticalPopUp » 14 Jan 2014 1:51 am wrote:
The Benghazi Transcripts: Top Defense officials briefed Obama on attack, not video or protest

By James Rosen Published January 13, 2014 FoxNews.com

Minutes after the American consulate in Benghazi came under assault on Sept. 11, 2012, the nation's top civilian and uniformed defense officials -- headed for a previously scheduled Oval Office session with President Obama -- were informed that the event was a "terrorist attack," declassified documents show. The new evidence raises the question of why the top military men, one of whom was a member of the president's Cabinet, allowed him and other senior Obama administration officials to press a false narrative of the Benghazi attacks for two weeks afterward...


Wohhhh! You are saying a politician lied? I don't believe it!!!

Listen, brah, they all need to hang or none of them. Don't be a hypocrite.
1

User avatar
Posted by onlyaladd
15 Jan 2014, 10:33 pm

onlyaladd       
User avatar
      

Posts: 20371
littlehawk12 » 14 Jan 2014 5:56 am wrote:
Like anyone is going to take someone named 'peepee' seriously. Go jump off the nearest cliff, homo..

Sorry bro. I like you but I had to laugh about reading that from littlehawk12. I guess tinychicken11 was wicked busy.
1

tharock220's Photo
Posted by tharock220
15 Jan 2014, 10:59 pm

tharock220      
     

Posts: 2294
My opinion on Glenn Beck is roughly the same as that of Maddow, Sharpton, and Hannity. That is to say they're useless from a journalistic point of view, and their only goal in life appears to be to spread misinformation with the ultimate intention of creating greater division among Americans.
1

User avatar
Posted by Regina
07 Jan 2014, 4:45 pm

Post 07 Jan 2014, 4:45 pm
Regina    
User avatar
   

Posts: 385
Has anyone else seen this? Is it something you would support?

http://anticorruptionact.org/ wrote:
YES, IT’S CONSTITUTIONAL!

Constitutional attorneys confirm that the American Anti-Corruption Act is constitutional. Check out their summary of the constitutionality here. The Act is being championed by the Represent.Us campaign. Click here to support this campaign.

ABOUT THE ACT

The Act was crafted by former Federal Election Commission chairman Trevor Potter in consultation with dozens of strategists, democracy reform leaders and constitutional attorneys from across the political spectrum.

The Act would transform how elections are financed, how lobbyists influence politics, and how political money is disclosed. It’s a sweeping proposal that would reshape the rules of American politics, and restore ordinary Americans as the most important stakeholders instead of major donors. The Act enjoys support from progressives and conservatives alike.



American Anti-Corruption Act wrote:
  1. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

    • PROVISION 1: PROHIBIT MEMBERS OF CONGRESS FROM RAISING FUNDS FROM THE
      INTERESTS THEY REGULATE AND FROM TAKING ACTIONS TO BENEFIT INTERESTS
      THAT SPEND HEAVILY TO INFLUENCE THEIR ELECTIONS

      1. Prohibit Members of Congress from fundraising from the interests they most
        directly regulate

      2. Prohibit Members of Congress from taking actions to benefit special interests that
        provide them with contributions or spend heavily to influence their elections
    • PROVISION 2: LIMIT CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND PROHIBIT CERTAIN
      FUNDRAISING ACTIVITIES BY LOBBYISTS, LOBBYIST CLIENTS, AND INDIVIDUALS
      INVOLVED IN LOBBYING EFFORTS

    • PROVISION 3: CLOSE THE REVOLVING DOOR

    • PROVISION 4: PROHIBIT CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE PACS, LOBBYISTS,
      AND COVERED ASSOCIATES OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS
  2. CAMPAIGN FINANCE

    • PROVISION 5: APPLY THE EXISTING CONTRIBUTION LIMITS THAT APPLY TO PACS TO
      SUPER PACS

    • PROVISION 6: EACH REGISTERED VOTER SHALL RECEIVE, ON AN BIENNIAL BASIS, A
      $100 TAX REBATE THAT THEY MAY USE TO MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS TO QUALIFYING
      FEDERAL CANDIDATES, POLITICAL PARTIES, AND POLITICAL COMMITTEES
      SEC 1. TAX REBATES.


      1. REBATES PROVIDED TO REGISTERED VOTERS TO MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS TO QUALIFYING
        FEDERAL CANDIDATES, POLITICAL PARTY COMMITTEES, AND POLITICAL COMMITTEES.—

      2. CONTRIBUTION OF TAX REBATES.—

      3. DISQUALIFICATION AND REPAYMENT OF TAX REBATES.—

      4. EXPIRATION OF TAX REBATES AND ALLOCATION OF UNUSED TAX REBATES

      5. REPEAL OF PARTY COORDINATED EXPENDITURE LIMITS FOR QUALIFIED POLITICAL PARTY
        COMMITTEES.—

      6. INCREASE IN TAX REBATE BASED ON INCREASES IN PRICE INDEX.—

      7. INCOME TAX LIABILITY.—

      8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—

      9. CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—

    • PROVISION 7: REVISE THE FEC’S COORDINATION REGULATIONS
  3. TRANSPARENCY

    • PROVISION 8: PROHIBIT MEMBERS OF CONGRESS FROM FUNDRAISING DURING
      CONGRESSIONAL WORKING HOURS, AND REQUIRE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO
      DISCLOSE FUNDRAISING ACTIVITIES THEY ENGAGE IN WHILE CONGRESS IS IN
      SESSION

    • PROVISION 9: AMEND THE LOBBYING DISCLOSURE ACT (LDA) TO EFFECTIVELY BRING
      EVERYONE WHO LOBBIES OR WHO ORGANIZES, LEADS, OR ADVISES LOBBYING
      EFFORTS WITHIN THE LDA DISCLOSURE PROVISIONS; ENHANCE LDA DISCLOSURE;
      AND STRENGTHEN ENFORCEMENT

    • PROVISION 10: ENHANCE TRANSPARENCY OF FUNDRAISING AND ELECTION
      SPENDING
  4. ENFORCEMENT


https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.unitedrepub ... isions.pdf
1

User avatar
Posted by onlyaladd
15 Jan 2014, 11:42 pm

Post 15 Jan 2014, 11:42 pm
onlyaladd       
User avatar
      

Posts: 20371
Of course this devolved into the merits of abortion. I love that they make condoms and birth control available to poor people( who benefit society the most by not having unplanned kids). That saves money in the long run big time. I'd like to see abortions reduced to the bare minimum, in a perfect world eliminated. But the point here is our money is not used for the abortions.
All this blustering you guys are doing with outright lies of what it is isn't advancing the discussion.
1

User avatar
Posted by Cannonpointer
15 Jan 2014, 9:32 pm

Cannonpointer 98% Macho Man
User avatar
98% Macho Man

Posts: 57350
TheAmerican » 15 Jan 2014 8:28 pm wrote:
...you should be ashamed of yourself, scumbag!

Telling everyone YOU did the 'coding' for the new forum? You DID NOT!

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2042#p145568

...same as you misused and adjusted the 'reputation points' at the old .org??

You're a disgrace!


I was making an inside joke. I make no bones that I am a luddite. I am way too busy pretending that I was a Navy SEAL to pretend I am a computer expert.

I take full responsibility for the misunderstanding. Clearly, stating that I hung on a cross was insufficient to tip you off that I was joking.
2

User avatar
Posted by Cannonpointer
16 Jan 2014, 1:08 am

Post 16 Jan 2014, 1:08 am
Cannonpointer 98% Macho Man
User avatar
98% Macho Man

Posts: 57350
littlehawk12 » 15 Jan 2014 11:54 pm wrote:
Mostly she is a disinformationalist..

According to you, one source is 100% legit, or they are 100% wrong. Must suck to have such a pea-brain..


No, son. We were clowning beck, and you came in all "above the fray" and ran some insincere puke about "taking what you like and leaving the rest" - basically, defending Beck in a chickenshit way you back away from if cornered.

I called you on your lukewarm, girlish defense at the time. Then, same night, I catch you clowning whats her name. You're a partisan hack who can't keep his panties up from thread to thread, son.
1

User avatar
Posted by Cannonpointer
16 Jan 2014, 2:15 am

Cannonpointer 98% Macho Man
User avatar
98% Macho Man

Posts: 57350
PoliticalPopUp » 16 Jan 2014 12:59 am wrote:
Keep trying to side step the issue you senile, old, twatfuck. You said I screech against those who take "public assistance" while I take it myself. I will ask you again if you are equating "public assistance" with disability. If you are, you are either stupid, or you are purposely conflating two very different gubment programs just to give yourself the satisfaction of calling me a hypocrite. You tell me which one it is...oh yeah....I almost forgot....fuck you....


Yes, being a net taker is being a net taker. Lots and lots and lots of folks have been caught faking disabilities - BUT THAT DOES NOT MAKE ME WANT TO TAKE AWAY YOUR DISABILITY PAYMENTS, dumbass. That does not make me demonize you, dumbass.

You, OTOH, will point to an abuse and then broad-brush an entire demographic. THAT is why I call you a hypocrite. You screech against people with just about any disability except your own type - as if being born in a crime riddled ghetto to a single mom and going to a shootemup school does not disable one in the job market.

We need to START with viewing everyone, until proved otherwise, as a legitimate child of god. Then we need to assess what it will take to get people into the mainstream culture. Clearly, Johnson was no friend of the black man, no friend of the poor white. But until we stop demonizing we cannot act in a unified and coherent way to deal with this country's inequities and BUILT IN poverty traps.

We the people gave a TREMENDOUS amount of federal power to republicans over the last 30+ years, including a full three terms of congress recently with absolute hegemony at the federal level. We have given dems FAR less power over the last 30+ years - yet you will prattle the repuke party line and pretend that they have answers. If they have them, son, they are keeping them as hole cards.

Name the issue - education? No Child's Behind Left - "small government" Reagan (who grew government like a mad man) made education a cabinet level position. Poverty? Six years of power, no reform attempted. Smaller government? National debt doubled, Constitutional rights erased, wars of choice fought on a credit card. Integrity in government? Lol. Treaties ignored, laws broken, wounded vets penned up in rat-infested roach pits, CARGO PLANE loads of 100 dollar bills "lost" (SOMEONE "found" them).

At every turn you are a hypocrite - including on the issue of taking care of those less fortunate. YOUR dole is "deserved" and THEIR dole isn't. You just suck, is all.
1

User avatar
Posted by MotherJonses
16 Jan 2014, 3:04 am

MotherJonses Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 2828
littlehawk12 » 16 Jan 2014 12:48 am wrote:
Cannonpointer » 16 Jan 2014 12:47 am wrote:

No, thank you. You are ineducable and gay. :)

We agree! AGAIN! lol



Drunk again I see, why else would you agree to being a homosexual who is so stupid he does not posses the ability to learn. :rofl:
1

User avatar
Posted by MotherJonses
16 Jan 2014, 3:11 am

MotherJonses Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 2828
bigsky » 15 Jan 2014 6:39 pm wrote:
TheNightStalker » 15 Jan 2014 6:34 pm wrote:
Planned Parenthood Did 1 Adoption Referral Per 149 Abortions

More PROOF that Planned Parthood's only purpose is to MURDER babies. You libs are ghouls.

(CNSNews.com) – In its latest annual report, released in December, Planned Parenthood says it did 327,166 abortion procedures in the course of one year and 2,197 adoption referrals. That works out to approximately 149 abortions for each adoption referral.
The data comes from an accounting of “patient care” Planned Parenthood says its “affiliate health centers” did in the year that ran from Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2012.
Planned Parenthood says in it new annual report that it received a total of $540.6 million in government grants and reimbursements for the fiscal year that ended on June 30, 2013. That accounted for almost 45 percent of the organization’s total revenue of $1,210.4.
The 327,166 abortions Planned Parenthood did in the year from Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept, 30, 2012 was down 6,798 abortions from the 333,964 abortions the organization did in the year from Oct. 1, 2010 to Sept. 30 2011.
Still, the 327,166 abortions that Planned Parenthood did from October 2011-September 2012 works out to approximately one abortion every 96 seconds.
If Planned Parenthood did abortions seven days a week, they would have needed to do approximately 896 per day to reach their annual total of 327,166.
The 327,166 abortions that Planned Parenthood did from October 2011-September 2012 was also more than the 318,172 people the Census Bureau estimated lived in the City of St. Louis, Mo., in 2012 or the 306,211 that lived in the City of Pittsburgh, Pa.
The 2,197 adoption referrals Planned Parenthood did in this most recent reporting year was down from the 2,300 it did in the previous year. That year (October 2010-September 2011) Planned Parenthood did approximately 1 adoption referral for each 145 abortions.
CNSNews.com contacted Planned Parenthood by phone and email to ask how much of the $540.6 million it got in government grants and reimbursements in fiscal 2012 came from federal government source and how much from state government sources.
CNSNews.com also asked Planned Parenthood how many of the 2,197 “adoption referrals to other agencies” Planned Parenthood made in fiscal 2012 actually resulted in adoptions, and if the organization planned to increase that number. Planned Parenthood had not responded by the time this story was posted.
- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/bar ... JcRuD.dpuf


libs would out number conservatives if they didnt kill all those kids..and for another thing...who the hell do those kids think they are,,,making an adult go through an abortion...selfish people is what an abortion is...



Well, more young people are liberal than conservative, I think with all the extras you would lose even more.

And to add the context that the cons always seem to miss...women who go to planned parenthood are looking for an abortion. Women who are looking for adoption probably look elsewhere which would skew those numbers.
1

User avatar
Posted by MotherJonses
16 Jan 2014, 4:07 am

MotherJonses Moderator
User avatar
Moderator

Posts: 2828
Cannonpointer » 16 Jan 2014 2:14 am wrote:
MotherJonses » 16 Jan 2014 2:04 am wrote:

Drunk again I see, why else would you agree to being a homosexual who is so stupid he does not posses the ability to learn. :rofl:


I just left that hanging there - it was too stupid to touch. I call him an ineducable homo, and he agrees with me.

It's his ba-ba. When he's on his ba-ba, he becomes a real assclown.



I have a mean streak, and just can't resist hitting a man who has knocked himself down. :P
1

george.oldman's Photo
Posted by george.oldman
16 Jan 2014, 4:31 am

george.oldman Emperor of the Pheasants
Emperor of the Pheasants

Posts: 9026
You are not authorised to read this forum.
1

george.oldman's Photo
Posted by george.oldman
16 Jan 2014, 4:18 am

george.oldman Emperor of the Pheasants
Emperor of the Pheasants

Posts: 9026
You are not authorised to read this forum.
1

george.oldman's Photo
Posted by george.oldman
16 Jan 2014, 4:37 am

george.oldman Emperor of the Pheasants
Emperor of the Pheasants

Posts: 9026
You are not authorised to read this forum.
1

User avatar
Posted by indago
16 Jan 2014, 4:42 am

Post 16 Jan 2014, 4:42 am
indago       
User avatar
      

Posts: 6831
Cannonpointer » 16 Jan 2014 3:40 am wrote:
indago » 16 Jan 2014 3:38 am wrote:
Anal Probe

From Opposing Views 13 January 2014:
--------------------------------------------------------------
David Eckert, the New Mexico man who was anally probed and forced to undergo a colonoscopy after police officers incorrectly assumed he had drugs in his rectum, found some justice following a court decision in his case. ...U.S. News & World Report reported that no drugs were found by police or doctors at the Gila Regional Medical Center in Silver City, N.M. Eckert had to undergo two digital anal probes, three enema insertions and ended with a surgical colonoscopy. ...In December, Hidalgo County and the City of Deming reached a settlement set at $1.6 million.
--------------------------------------------------------------
article/video


I have hung around Area 51, I have hung around airports and smarted off at security - why can't I get an anal probe? :(


MOON 'EM
1

george.oldman's Photo
Posted by george.oldman
16 Jan 2014, 5:06 am

george.oldman Emperor of the Pheasants
Emperor of the Pheasants

Posts: 9026
You are not authorised to read this forum.
1