Hillary makes it official

[JSt0rm]

Looks like my memory partially failed me. That's the number they hope to raise.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/13/us/politics/hillary-clinton-2016-presidential-campaign.html

LOLOLOOLOLOL so the zork dude yesterday going on a rant about her having 2.5 bill was probably duped by one of your echo chambers.

 

[dank69]

It was "lie of the year", quite a difference, no?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ar-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/


Here are the top fact checked politicians:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...t-cards-politifacts-top-10-most-fact-checked/

Let's check the other presidential contenders while we're at it.

Rand Paul:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/rand-paul/

LOL Ted Cruz:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/ted-cruz/

 

[MongGrel]

Is that a serious question? Doesn't the first family get SS for life?

Yes.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I believe secret service protection for free was scaled back after Clinton.

 

[CZroe]

So you think it would be a good strategy to surround herself with a bunch of gotcha gop teaparty people? Unfortunately for you she is going to actually TRY to win. Instead of trying to lose like you apparently think she should.

Is that what you think makes up "everyday Iowans?"

She could try admitting that she met supporters instead of lying. She's afraid of a Joe the Plumber moment. She'd rather stage hers to give the appearance that she handled it well rather than slip up with a line like "spread around the wealth."

 

[CZroe]

Yawn. Instead of doing some self reflection about crashing the economy and getting thousands of Americans killed and trillions wasted for a mistake, Republicans are on top of important issues, like whether Iowans Clinton spoke to are "everyday" or not.

Did you forget that it was a bipartisan effort? Hillary needs to reflect as much as anyone. Everyone except Barry was for it before they were against it. /Kerry

 

[JSt0rm]

"spread around the wealth."

^^ thats red meat for the republicans. All these commies in the wings waiting to do harm to the american dream.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Let's check the other presidential contenders while we're at it.

Rand Paul:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/rand-paul/

LOL Ted Cruz:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/ted-cruz/

Holy crap is Teddy a blathering liar. wtf.... Way to keep that bar set really low Tejas.

 

[UberNeuman]

 

[JSt0rm]

Holy crap is Teddy a blathering liar. wtf.... Way to keep that bar set really low Tejas.

You cant trust that website its all part of the commie liberal socialist conspiracy.

 

[theeedude]

Did you forget that it was a bipartisan effort? Hillary needs to reflect as much as anyone. Everyone except Barry was for it before they were against it. /Kerry

GOP hasn't learned anything from it or the economic disaster or changed their policies. Still for trickle down, still for deregulation, still for war, except now with Iran.

 

[sportage]

Ok. I will admit it.
THIS is why I soooo want Hillary as our next president.
And why you should too...



"GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN MY ASS"

 

[werepossum]

Interesting. Now your argument is "I don't have to back up my bullshit because it happened several years ago." Nope, that's not how it works. You said something, now back it up. You're trying to dance because you realize you're busted. What's strange is that in theory you should be happy to be wrong, because you think it's something bad.

In reality of course you never cared about that, she's an Evil Librul so any bullshit that's needed to justify your hatred will be uncritically accepted.

We didn't. Still waiting to hear why the Romneys are not and the Clintons are. My guess is that in this case, like so many others, you didn't know what you were talking about.

Busted? Hardly. I'm just not willing to do your homework for you. Anyone who supports Hillary at this point wouldn't care if she went on live television beating children to death with baby seals, so there's no point in me wasting my limited time trying to prove anything.

Again, the Romney family has never produced a President or even a Vice President. Not even a First Lady. Closest they ever came was a six year governor. The Clinton family has produced a President. I can only point it out for you, I can't understand it for you.

 

[werepossum]

You are correct, but it still amazes me how many people actually think he was impeached for getting head and stuffing Monica with a cigar.

Yeah . . . "think" is probably not the correct term here. lol

 

[nickqt]

Busted? Hardly. I'm just not willing to do your homework for you. Anyone who supports Hillary at this point wouldn't care if she went on live television beating children to death with baby seals, so there's no point in me wasting my limited time trying to prove anything.

Again, the Romney family has never produced a President or even a Vice President. Not even a First Lady. Closest they ever came was a six year governor. The Clinton family has produced a President. I can only point it out for you, I can't understand it for you.

You think that because there was a Clinton I and might be a Clinton II (by marriage) that it's a dynasty.

Mitt Rmoney's father was also a governor.

Never mind the ignorant remark about Hillary beating baby seals and evil libruuls clapping for it, because herp and also derp.

Yeah . . . "think" is probably not the correct term here. lol

You're right.

Clinton was impeached for lying about getting head and stuffing a cigar in Monica. Massively huge difference, or something. Most likely because freedom.

 

[theeedude]

Hillary was in politics long before she met Bill Clinton. Dynasty not found.
She was a Republican until GOP turned racist under Nixon as part of their Southern strategy.

 

[werepossum]

You think that because there was a Clinton I and might be a Clinton II (by marriage) that it's a dynasty.

Mitt Rmoney's father was also a governor.

Never mind the ignorant remark about Hillary beating baby seals and evil libruuls clapping for it, because herp and also derp.

You're right.

Clinton was impeached for lying about getting head and stuffing a cigar in Monica. Massively huge difference, or something. Most likely because freedom.

lol Thank you for proving my point.

Just to further amuse us, why don't you try counting up Presidents and then counting up governors. Hint: One group is significantly larger, significantly less powerful, and therefore significantly less elite . . .

 

[werepossum]

Hillary was in politics long before she met Bill Clinton. Dynasty not found.
She was a Republican until GOP turned racist under Nixon as part of their Southern strategy.

Um, no. She was a Republican until the GOP kicked her ass out of the Nixon investigation for being a nutjob. She is the one who asserted that Nixon had no right to any legal representation. Oddly, that was before her husband was elected to the same office and she decided that the entire federal government serves as the President's lawyer.

 

[theeedude]

Um, no. She was a Republican until the GOP kicked her ass out of the Nixon investigation for being a nutjob. She is the one who asserted that Nixon had no right to any legal representation. Oddly, that was before her husband was elected to the same office and she decided that the entire federal government serves as the President's lawyer.

That is an inaccurate and also illogical statement, since she already worked for a Democrat Walter Mondale in 1970, long before Watergate and the Nixon impeachment. I suggest you learn some facts before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.

 

[Bowfinger]

Um, no. She was a Republican until the GOP kicked her ass out of the Nixon investigation for being a nutjob. She is the one who asserted that Nixon had no right to any legal representation. Oddly, that was before her husband was elected to the same office and she decided that the entire federal government serves as the President's lawyer.

Nope. I don't know whether you were duped again, or just making it up again. Either way, you are wrong again.

 

[werepossum]

That is an inaccurate and also illogical statement, since she already worked for a Democrat Walter Mondale in 1970, long before Watergate and the Nixon impeachment. I suggest you learn some facts before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.

Nope. I don't know whether you were duped again, or just making it up again. Either way, you are wrong again.

lol Mea culpa. I was speaking off the cuff, knew she was a nut during the investigation and made the logical assumption she was therefore one of ours. I'll therefore revise my statement to say that she drafted the brief, but it was clearly some other Democrat's fault, and she left to, um, spend more time with her family.

 

[ivwshane]

You are a real piece of shit aren't you! You make a claim and when asked to back it up you act like a third grader and basically say, "make me!".

Well, you little rooster sucker, here is her 1993 health care reform proposal.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/t2GPO...g/BILLS-103hr3600ih/pdf/BILLS-103hr3600ih.pdf


Here is her 2007 proposal:

http://elbertcounty.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/americanhealthchoicesplan.pdf

You'll note that not a single one has the word, "jail", or, "prison" in it relating to fines or failure to comply.

All other searches related to your claim that also made the same claim were right wing websites with ZERO citations.

You got duped once again and instead of admitting it you bitch out like the partisan hack you are!

Busted? Hardly. I'm just not willing to do your homework for you. Anyone who supports Hillary at this point wouldn't care if she went on live television beating children to death with baby seals, so there's no point in me wasting my limited time trying to prove anything.

Again, the Romney family has never produced a President or even a Vice President. Not even a First Lady. Closest they ever came was a six year governor. The Clinton family has produced a President. I can only point it out for you, I can't understand it for you.

Lol at your arbitrary line you've drawn to protect your bubble about romneys family history. You are one pathetic piece of trash!

 

[werepossum]

You are a real piece of shit aren't you! You make a claim and when asked to back it up you act like a third grader and basically say, "make me!".

Well, you little rooster sucker, here is her 1993 health care reform proposal.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/t2GPO...g/BILLS-103hr3600ih/pdf/BILLS-103hr3600ih.pdf


Here is her 2007 proposal:

http://elbertcounty.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/americanhealthchoicesplan.pdf

You'll note that not a single one has the word, "jail", or, "prison" in it relating to fines or failure to comply.

All other searches related to your claim that also made the same claim were right wing websites with ZERO citations.

You got duped once again and instead of admitting it you bitch out like the partisan hack you are!

Lol at your arbitrary line you've drawn to protect your bubble about romneys family history. You are one pathetic piece of trash!

You probably aren't aware, but you can save a PDF down, open it with a PDF reader, and actually search for words. Well, not you per se, but normal people. In fact, whomever puts your helmet on you when you go outside can find rather a lot of references to prison. (Hint: When the bill says "imprison", it means to send someone to prison. Also, when it refers to changing penalties in other codes, it's ain't talking about time outs.)

Go to your first link.
Save it as a PDF.
Open it in Adobe Acrobat Reader.
Search for section 226 Bribery and graft in connection with health care.
Whoever corruptly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to a health care official to influence any of the health care official's actions, decisions, or duties relating to a health alliance or health plan, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than fifteen years, or both. Same threat for the health care official.

Now, this is in a section entitled "Bribery and graft in connection with health care", so clearly it's there to protect us, right? But look at the definition of "health care official". It includes employees of any organization providing services under contract to a health alliance or health plan.

The scenario (as I recall it from almost twenty years ago) was thus:
You are a Medicare patient.
Your doctor is an employee of an organization contracting with the government to provide services to you under Medicare.
Your doctor diagnoses you with a particular form of brain cancer (let's call it neoproggiplasm. Symptoms include voting Democrat and blathering.)
There are several possible drugs to treat this disease.
Medicare will pay for the cheapest two (let's call them Generical and Cheapomil) which are less effective but good enough for most people, but not the newer, more expensive drug (let's call it Miracal.)
Your doctor therefore tells you she'll write you a prescription for Cheapomil.
You go home and read everything you can find about neoproggiplasm, including claims of wondrous response to Miracal.
You come in and tell your doctor you want Miracal instead of Cheapomil.
Your doctor explains that Medicare does not cover Miracal, but if you continue to regress on Cheapomil she can then prescribe Generical.
You tell your doctor that you will pay for your Miracal from your own pocket. In fact, you'll pay for the necessary liver enzyme testing as well.

By a strict reading, you have just committed bribery by offering a health care official something of value to influence her decision, for which you can be fined and/or imprisoned for up to fifteen years.

Before you scoff at such a thing - was bribery legal before?

If not, why would this bill need to redefine it?

Remember the words of President Obama: Maybe Grandma doesn't get the hip replacement, maybe Grandma just gets a wheelchair and pain pills. He didn't add "unless she pays for it", did he?

Now that I've backslid and done the search for you, you can move on to "but that would never happen!" and "but that's a good thing!"

 

[nickqt]

The scenario (as I recall it from almost twenty years ago) was thus:
You are a Medicare patient.
Your doctor is an employee of an organization contracting with the government to provide services to you under Medicare.
Your doctor diagnoses you with a particular form of brain cancer (let's call it neoproggiplasm. Symptoms include voting Democrat and blathering.)
There are several possible drugs to treat this disease.
Medicare will pay for the cheapest two (let's call them Generical and Cheapomil) which are less effective but good enough for most people, but not the newer, more expensive drug (let's call it Miracal.)
Your doctor therefore tells you she'll write you a prescription for Cheapomil.
You go home and read everything you can find about neoproggiplasm, including claims of wondrous response to Miracal.
You come in and tell your doctor you want Miracal instead of Cheapomil.
Your doctor explains that Medicare does not cover Miracal, but if you continue to regress on Cheapomil she can then prescribe Generical.
You tell your doctor that you will pay for your Miracal from your own pocket. In fact, you'll pay for the necessary liver enzyme testing as well.

By a strict reading, you have just committed bribery by offering a health care official something of value to influence her decision, for which you can be fined and/or imprisoned for up to fifteen years.

Before you scoff at such a thing - was bribery legal before?

If not, why would this bill need to redefine it?

Remember the words of President Obama: Maybe Grandma doesn't get the hip replacement, maybe Grandma just gets a wheelchair and pain pills. He didn't add "unless she pays for it", did he?

Now that I've backslid and done the search for you, you can move on to "but that would never happen!" and "but that's a good thing!"

Bribery would be giving someone money to do something they wouldn't normally do.

I am continually amazed that anyone, even while holding his nose, can get behind someone who would author a "health care" bill which would put you in jail for using your own money to pay for your own health care. Have we really fallen that far?

First:
Someone on Medicare isn't "using [their] own money to pay for [their] own health care."

Second:
The bill didn't make it illegal to pay for your own healthcare out of your own pocket.

The only thing the bill did was define what bribery was and the penalty for it, something very typical in all bills.

If you're on Medicare, evil gub'mint is paying for your healthcare.

If evil gub'mint says prescribe cheaper generic because it's just as good as Namebrand, and someone slips the doctor $50.00 to get the doctor to prescribe Namebrand while having Medicare pay for it, then, uh, that is bribery.

 

[werepossum]

Bribery would be giving someone money to do something they wouldn't normally do.



First:
Someone on Medicare isn't "using [their] own money to pay for [their] own health care."

Second:
The bill didn't make it illegal to pay for your own healthcare out of your own pocket.

The only thing the bill did was define what bribery was and the penalty for it, something very typical in all bills.

If you're on Medicare, evil gub'mint is paying for your healthcare.

If evil gub'mint says prescribe cheaper generic because it's just as good as Namebrand, and someone slips the doctor $50.00 to get the doctor to prescribe Namebrand while having Medicare pay for it, then, uh, that is bribery.

Cool, you skipped right past "but that would never happen!" and went straight to "but that's a good thing!"

Just to be clear, Medicare is age-based, not means-based.