On Eve of Trump Repeal Effort, Obamacare Campaigns for ‘Young Invincibles’

Like or Dislike:

8

2

Yes, I saw that clip DePolar. Some would say the Democrat’s have had a bunker mentality for some time now. The more they lose, the louder the rant.

Like or Dislike:

8

6

Here’s a good counter-move Trump might consider;

Challenge the votes in ALL states Clinton won. She would have NO EC votes when the EC votes on 12/19.

Of course, the above is a flippant suggestion. The People who obey laws and respect rules would never make such a spiteful move. But others who DON’T follow state and federal laws (e.g. government confidential data and top secrets stored on a personally owned email server to circumvent FOIA laws and jeopardize US national security in dozens of ways) don’t think twice about being hypocritical or spiteful/ jealous of law-abiding citizens.

Like or Dislike:

7

4

Your stat questions have NO relevance to the issue.

The regression approach you suggest is meaningless with regard to the vote.

There is no sense in performing regression analyses when GLMs are much more effective, and provide information to better understand the value of each predictor variable.

Too many restrictive assumptions are required for a regression analysis to provide flexibility in forecasting a dependent variable of importance. IF you want to forecast the price or market value of a house, you need MANY predictor variables, and cannot effectively employ RA for such without awkward combination of variables.

The possibility of a recount changing the result of an election is a much simpler statistical concept than regression analysis. Consider the known concept of cities versus rural areas voting Dem vs Republican. A swing of significance is more likely to occur in a smaller district; i.e. rural area, than a city district. But due to the high volume of stats, the CLT implies a very low likelihood of a significant shift in votes in a recount. That is buttressed by election night ‘calling’ elections by the news media for one candidate long before voting or final vote tabulations ends.

Like or Dislike:

3

8

The votes were counted and people with high qualifications have said there are inconsistencies and want them verified; the winning candidate has claimed the vote total is off by millions. You don’t like or accept democracy nor the will of the people, so you don’t want the votes counted and verified, it’s that simple.

You don’t know the answer, because you don’t know stats, and lied about it being your degree. Also, you clueless dolt, regression analysis is one of the ways people made the claim (which I think is wrong) that the votes might be wrong, so you don’t know the stats, and don’t know anything about this case other than what you have been told to parrot by right-wing sites. In fact, I do not think there is one thing you do know, you truly seem Agent-level clueless on every single, topic, but you also lie about our knowledge, which is an embarrassment.

“here is NO vote machine hacking possible in one state (Michigan or Wisconsin?) where all votes are manual, not computer based with an internet link to hack.”

STFU, moron. not all votes are manual in these places, you ignorant POS. That is the point, in their analysis they found that in places with touchscreen voting instead of paper ballots the vote totals were consistently higher for Trump. God you are in a completely fact-free, knowledge-free world. Clueless on every single topic.

“If you want a recount, do it yourself.”

Actually, they are paying to have it done. You are a clown.

Also, moron, your explanation of stats is brutal. You clearly have no clue, which is why you couldn’t answer the question, which are basic questions and had to go on a moronic rant. You are on the agency side, luckily for you.

Like or Dislike:

0

3

“Please name the inconsistencies that you claim were already found.”

It is cleaely stated in there, idiot. Maybe read this instead in order to understand a major problem with many conservatives like you, Agent and Bob.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy

Maybe if you and 10 of your fake colleagues with degrees you lie about get together you can work together to understand what you read.

Like or Dislike:

2

5

Prove illegal immigrants voted in meaningful numbers, liar.

Like or Dislike:

7

3

Time will provide the count of ILLEGAL VOTES. Wait a few weeks.

Like or Dislike:

5

2

@Bob; look at vote totals for ANY Sanctuary city. Compare that to population totals per the US Census or other verifiable sources. Live and learn.

Like or Dislike:

0

3

… The emails show a person brought it up as a possible line of attack, and that they didn’t use it. That is not the same as doing it for years, moron. Also, kiddo, Trump pushed this for years in a racist manner, but of course as a virulent racist you deny this. Oh right, you aren’t racist, you just support the same people, policies, and arguments as racists. You have said a person basically has to use the N word to be racist, you don’t believe in, know about or care about context. You deny conservatives in the South were racist (and still are), and deny the Southern Strategy was a racist tactic used by conservatives. You would have supported slavery as better for Africans if you were alive in the 1800’s.

You aren’t competent to discuss this because you live in a world of fantasy and don’t hold a single mainstream belief, nor do you know the basics about even recent history. If you deny the citizenship charges against Obama were racist, even after he presented his birth certificate you are a straight up, outright racist, and a 100% idiot. The only consistent beliefs you hold are not wanting to pay taxes, wanting to pass externalities onto others, and accepting every right wing talking point as established fact. Clueless, sad, lying Bob.

Like or Dislike:

4

3

Pssst; Franken Stein MISSED THE DEADLINE to file for a recount in PA.

Trump CANNOT BE DENIED an EC win without all 3 of PA, WI, and MI. Further, MI just certified their vote results, with Trump winning.

Like or Dislike:

2

4

DePolarBearables,

You said, “Feel free to leave the USA at any time you feel PresidenTrump isn’t running the US as you prefer.” Therefore, based on your own logic and the fact that you are still here, you feel President Obama has run the country as you prefer.

Like or Dislike:

4

3

Liberals are the ones who RECENTLY, BEFORE THE ELECTION, stated they wold leave the USA if Trump won.

Very few conservatives made similar statements about Clinton winning or Obama winning.

I tolerate the Administration of Obama because I know it would be 4 or 8 years of depressing economic conditions and social divisiveness based on his campaign tactics. The LONG NATIONAL NIGHTMARE is almost over. I am courageous enough to wait it out rather than run and hide in a Socialist nation because I believe America is worth fighting for, against tyrannic Socialists who wanted to, but failed to, transform it into a Socialist nation. Thank God for that!

Like or Dislike:

2

1

“DePolarBearables,

Have you seen the economic numbers? Depressing economic conditions such as record consecutive months of jobs growth, increasing GDP, reduced unemployment, stabilized LPR even with 10,000+ baby boomers retiring daily, record corporate profits, largest % increase in wages since November 2008, low inflation, increased consumer confidence.”

GDP growth after a near depression is supposed to be higher, but we have averaged quite low. Also, corporate profits tend to be good during dips and recoveries, especially when Obama pumps money into them, but that is a bubble of huge spending that will have a long term cost. That is not a good economic affect.

We have housing costs increased from the bubble, intentionally, incomes did not increase outside of the norm, and were slow for a recession, so all these things are bad.

Having consecutive slow job growth is not good growth, lower unemployment rates are only lower due to the LPR being low which sucks, and is not due to baby boomers and college students, that accounts for just under half.

You keep on painting a very rosy picture for Obama, whereas I still know students who cannot get good paying jobs and instead settle for crap paying jobs.

Like or Dislike:

1

2

“You cannot compare this recovery to any other because we never experienced such a collapse in modern times. Technology and high productivity make it far more difficult to increase the LPR even in good economic conditions. In addition, the increase in globalization makes it difficult to increase GDP even during a recovery.”

Your productivity comment is bullcrap. Why are we outsourcing jobs if we have high productivity? Think about it. Assembly jobs aren’t productivity? As you once said NO EXCUSES. Right? Or do you just make these up for Obama? The growth rates are worse than Reagan, end of story. We can compare to other time frames, as this is an anomaly.

“I will agree that the economy could possibly be experiencing a better recovery, but to say economic conditions are depressed cannot be based on facts and data and only opinion.”

Hahahaha, no. The LPR being low is something you can explain away, but to the people who don’t have jobs, because of “productivity” they are depressed in recovery, regardless of the why you just tried to explain away. Facts show this recovery is slower than normal. Reagan had the LPR rate go up with the unemployment rate going down, interest rates fell without the need for spending (which as I showed, Reagan tried to decrease this but democrats blocked it) and he set things up for growth.

“To use anecdotal evidence, such as, “I still know students who cannot get good paying jobs and instead settle for crap paying jobs.” does not bode well for your argument.”

I already used the LPR connected to the unemployment rate, and mentioned wages. I used a personal example to appeal to your heart, and you use these often. Don’t pull anecdotal bullshit with me. I don’t fall for it. That was meant to connect the fact that people aren’t able to get jobs, and I’m sure you know college grads making shit for beans wages. In my state the pay for Bestbuy was the same in 2007 as it is now in 2016 but every cost of living has increased, much of it due to Obama making the cost of housing high. That alone is enough to make him a terrible president. We had NO reason to do that, and NO evidence it helped incomes or unemployment which have risen slow and you create excuses for! It is harder to live now in WA state than it was before Obama, and rent has doubled between that same time frame, due largely to housing costs being inflated.

“As I stated, there is more than enough money for corporations to pay more, and they are. Maybe your friends need to put forth more effort in selling themselves or showing they provide more value to their employers.”

What? That is not what you said, you said corporate profits are higher. Also, CEO’s typically make about 1% of the firm’s revenues, I have shown this before, there is not plenty of room for CEO’s to pay more unless there is a substantial difference in taxes paid (the corporate tax rate). Also, note that many of these companies have not increased the pay of their CEO. Some have. Most haven’t. Someone here was recently complaining about such a company where the CEO made 100 million, and he has stayed at that $100 million, as the company profits have doubled. So where is the money going Ron? You say they have enough to pay these people eh? Profit margins are slim, and they need cash to reinvest. A shift of 15% in the corporate tax rate would help a massive amount. As for my “friends” you are wrong on that, and I’m going to bluntly tell you to screw yourself, they all work harder and better, than you.

The job market is for a fact bad right now. The LPR rate is down, baby boomers and retirees account for less than half, which means the unemployment rate should be a few points higher, and that means, that there are TONS of people who can’t find jobs not because they don’t know how, but because they aren’t there!

Like or Dislike:

0

2

“Your productivity comment is bullcrap. Why are we outsourcing jobs if we have high productivity? Think about it. Assembly jobs aren’t productivity?”

Clueless and stupid beyond belief. Even basic facts are in dispute with this guy

“which as I showed, Reagan tried to decrease this but democrats blocked it)”

Bullshit, liar. I’ve responded, as have others, dozens of times this isn’t true, we’ve shown you that he blocked the budget you cite because he wanted more spending in his budget. He cut social safety net spending. Also, kid, the article you copy and paste repeatedly, is from the first year of his presidency, he was president beyond 1981, which with your knowledge of history you may not know including when he was unfit to hold office, but Republicans protected him illegally because they don’t care about the country’s well-being. But it was after they started using astrology to make important decisions in the White House, but you think he’s the greatest president ever, and view the criminal as a man to be honored.

“As for my “friends” you are wrong on that, and I’m going to bluntly tell you to screw yourself, they all work harder and better, than you”

You are pure garbage. Don’t ever pretend to be offended when people respond to you in a way that doesn’t fit the standards you have decided on as the Rules for that day. Your friends admittedly walk up to women and sexually assault them, but hey, it’s just “getting some”. They, like you are fucking garbage.

Your labor force participation rate line is pure Bob, aka idiotic, and contrary to almost all mainstream research. I provided studies from academics and the Fed saying almost all of the decrease has been due to aging workers and the crash, your dismissed then without reading them, because you are a pseudo-intellectual joker and they did not match your predetermined belief which is necessary to complete your primary goal of blaming Obama and pretending Republicans are Great. Of course you threw in some Bob Math too.

You are a total clown in here, nobody with an IQ above 85 takes you seriously. Go away.

Like or Dislike:

1

3

“If we have such high productivity which is killing jobs, we would not be shifting millions of manufacturing jobs. It’s that simple”

Productivity, which doesn’t seem much lower as you claim, seeing as it is at almost an all-time high in the US. Many economists also believe it is actually HIGHER since these numbers might underestimate or miss increased productivity from new tech-driven sources, like Uber for example.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/OPHNFB

I see nothing but jobs created, not killed, for the last 7 years, unlike the time before that, when your preferred idiotic policies were in action.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth

There is no point having a debate with you, because you don’t operate in reality.

“You have to show where Reagan asked specifically for spending increases across the board.”

I never claimed across the board, a qualifier you use, so you can cite one place he wanted to cut, like assistance to poor babies, so they would die faster, like the Republicans are doing now. I said, and it’s not debatable, he proposed a budget with more spending than the budget you religiously cite. You are a clueless idiot who doesn’t know history, economics, or even what is reality.

Productivity is not down. Jobs are not down. The labor force participation rate is down mostly due to an aging workforce and the effects of the crash, like people who are not skilled enough or qualified to re-enter the workforce but might want to. Get into reality again if you want actual debate

Like or Dislike:

0

2

“If we have such high productivity which is killing jobs, we would not be shifting millions of manufacturing jobs. It’s that simple. ”

So our productivity now is lower than when? Like 1 brief time ever, idiot. Your Apple rant is moronic to the bone. It would get you an “F” in an economics course.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=c8FI

Most things in economics actually aren’t simple, even though you claim otherwise, because you ignore all actual economic research and most math.

“GDP growth after a near depression is supposed to be higher, but we have averaged quite low.”

But everybody who follows this at even an elementary level, and isn’t an idiot, knows that the US has increasingly been intertwined in a worldwide economy, and down economies elsewhere also hurt the US, especially with how much of the US economy has become finance and tech. The US growth rate has outpaced GDP growth of other industrialized nations, even if if is not higher than in previous years. The sequestration alone dropped the growth rate by almost half a percentage per year according to the Fed. Massively reducing the deficit, as Obama did, is a contractionary policy, and contractionary policies are, of course, contractionary and reduce GDP growth as well.

You have no knowledge about economics Bob, and deny most mainstream economics, and every economic study I have ever seen presented. You do not even know the basic data, e.g. you think productivity is down when it is not, and it is not even debatable. You are not qualified to discuss this seriously, but I have a feeling that won’t stop you since you won’t admit to basic grammatical errors, or video evidence. Sad.

Of course, you are a nut when it comes to economic views and believe BS conspiracy theories like the government is manipulating inflation figures, so they cannot be trusted, because every source of data you don’t believe or doesn’t support your theory must be explained away, so you won’t believe these productivity numbers. On top of that, these are probably lower than in reality, because many believe they do not capture the advances in new technology.

Like or Dislike:

0

1

Yeah he is gone. What a coincidence, now he does not have to answer the Cook questions, provide his Iraq numbers, or anything else, and he can keep screaming about how right he is. Just like the last 2 times with the Cook rebuttals. What a fraudulent, fundamentally dishonest person. Lyin Bob

Like or Dislike:

2

2

DePolar, I think maybe Josh and Andrew are not monitoring this blog closely to pick up all the insults and name calling of the left. Actu and UW should have been gone long ago.

Like or Dislike:

3

3

actu is a foul-mouthed, immature, sore loser. He’s just as divisive and troll-like as UW. He is the most likely owner of the BOT app that repetitively votes on posts.

Like or Dislike:

2

1

DePolar, did you know that this country has more government jobs than manufacturing jobs now and yet the left thinks our economy is just great and GDP has yet to hit 3% in 8 years of recovery summers? We haven’t had the right type of growth and that is a FACT!

Like or Dislike:

0

2

Ron, these guys are dumber than I thought. They don’t know the most basic, high school definitions of words, much less theories, math, history, etc. I don’t understand how any of them are employed in any roll, but I’m disturbed they are all on the agency side and take money for advising the public. The agents I work with are head and shoulders above these clowns, but then again they aren’t in garbage markets. Agent, Yogi and Bob have supposedly been in the industry for decades but they aren’t qualified intellectually to be entry-level assistants, IMO, and there’s no underwriting role they could work in at any level because they simply cannot comprehend what is reality and what is fiction.

Like or Dislike:

0

3

“Which is why you said the Cook et al study said that the majority of scientists supported catastrophic global warming?”

It says how much of climate change is man made, and how much of the warming is due to man. Your previous argument was that they could not possibly know how much was man made, that it made no sense it could be over 100% (because you don’t know confidence intervals), and that such a majority of scientists did not support that conclusion. You then changed your argument to how catastrophic they said it was, because you are a pseudo-intellecutal, lying, clown, and that seemed like the reasonable moderate position to you. Everything you state is an outright lie (like this), a mischaracterization, outright wrong, or an insane rant. You then presented a “study” that was actually a blog post referencing studies that almost all referenced the study “debunking” the Cook study. I showed you that this study was wrong, and had been discredited as having serious mathematical errors, which as an adherent to Bob Math, meant you ignored it and started presenting a different blog post, claiming it was the one you originally presented. This was the Bob Trifecta of retardation, lies, and terrible math.

“Well then, how have I been here this long?”

We’ve established that, idiot. You are on the customer side in a position where sales matter, not actually measuring risk and pricing it accordingly based on math and probability, neither of which you understand at even a high high school/low college level. Agent has been around for decades too, that’s the point, moron. In many of these roles intelligence and education is 100% irrelevant. And actually, your pseudo-intellectualism and suspected (by me, even though you refuse to answer) autism is actually a benefit, because it tricks people into thinking you are knowledgeable. You have shown you are a pathological liar with no qualms about lying, so you are probably good at retaining customers and blaming everything on everybody but yourself, as you do with Republicans.

” I know more than you do, I assure you, in the commercial field.”

Yes, I know, because you are a genius (sarcasm, obviously). Just like you knew I was 12 during 9/11, knew I was 25 at one point, knew I didn’t work in insurance, knew I lived in the Northeast, knew I had a degree in arts instead of economics, and knew the multiple women who accused you of rape wanted you, and then knew they were just jealous. What you THINK you know, and what you actually know are almost completely opposite, because you aren’t intelligent, and have a distorted view of the world.

You are a clown, bro, stop pretending to be smart, and for the love of the God you pretend to follow, stop lying.

Like or Dislike:

0

3

I’m curious, you said you didn’t lose all your freedoms. Which ones were taken away from you?

Like or Dislike:

1

4

You are so full of crap Bob. You refuse to look into anything that isn’t spouted by right wingers. You repeat the same nonsense over and over.

“but as the CBO has said many times, the republican plan would bring it down by 20% compared to the ACA. Also, it would provide preventative care, pre existing conditions, etc.”

No. They said once it would, if the tax loopholes were cut as effectively as Ryan claimed. This is a fantasy. Also, idiot, the said very clearly it was NOT a comprehensive study which is contrary to what you present it as. Your claim is a lie, you are a liar. Also, as I’ve shown over and over that plan was killed in committee by Republicans, but that doesn’t count because you did not know that, therefore in your world it does not exist. Idiotic. On top of that the current plan only cuts costs because it replaces Medicare with tax credits, which do nothing for poorer people, and subsidies, which I’ve shown will be a real cut in 5/10/15 years of 18%/24%/46% because they tie increases to cpi instead of health costs inflation. For younger people and middle aged people it does away with the current system of Medicare,even if it keeps the same name. You and your plan are bs, you are a pseudo intellectual clown. That is even if you assume the Republicans close tax loopholes, they are effective as they claim, and they keep them permanently. None of those are remotely possible.

“The four plans I gave you, are all progressive in that they are steps forward. Progressive is not the antonym of conservative”

No, clueless dolt. They shift far more cost onto the less wealthy from the more wealthy, that is, by definition, the opposite of progressive. Your say they are progressive because your main goals are trying to be perceived as moderate, and trying to be perceived as intelligent. You are neither, and you don’t know what you are talking about.

“There are 4. I have already quoted what I like. The democrat plan doesn’t deal with adverse selection. ”

Wrong, as always. Stop using the term” adverse selection,” you don’t understand it. The Democratic (not “democrat”, it’s hard to take someone who doesn’t know the name of half the major parties seriously) plan has the mandate, which the Republican plan eliminates, and makes sure people with good health do not avoid insurance until they need care, and the system is not filled with primarily sick people. The cbo initial summary you cite assumes people will stay insured, which is simply false based on past evidence. Your idiotic plan would result in younger or healthier people avoiding insurance until they needed care, and then signing up to cover costs, which could not be avoided because it supposedly doesn’t block preexisting conditions. You don’t understand the plans, don’t understand averse selection, and don’t have a grasp on even the names of both major parties,you are a joke, nobody takes you seriously.

As for being a dangerous extremist, get a grip. You have supported torture, even if it includes innocents, you have rationalized killing terrorists’ innocent families, you have marginalized sexual assault and rape, because as you’ve stated, some of the “best men you know” and even you, do it, because it’s just “getting some” and you know when it’s appropriate, but you’ve also admittedly been accused of rape multiple times. Of course you can do no wrong, so they were liars and jealous. What a pattern, everybody lies about you! Walking up to a woman, grabbing her, and kissing her is only being a douche to you, but is sexual assault in reality, which you refuse to join or accept. You also said if left leaning people didn’t stop pushing back against right wingers there would have to be a civil war. You are an extremist by definition. You’ve also supported laws against non-Christians, and said homosexuality is a sin, along with supporting Agent when he’s called gays and trans people perverts. You are an extremist to the bone, and marginally different than Timothy McVeigh when it comes to your stated ideology, at best.

Like or Dislike:

1

1

An additional note UW:

I have been in insurance for almost 15 years.

To say I don’t know about risk pools…Is really something else. I’m aware of the concept of the mandate. I’m also aware, that the plan is so bad, inclusive of these new insureds the plan still ended up going up as much as the CBO said it would. That is called bad regulation that needs to be removed entirely. If we took the mandate out of the bad ACA bill currently, yes, it would break the ACA.

If we made a plan that had good regulation, then a potential mandate would bring costs down even more. This plan is a failure if it expanded the risk pool to less averse areas and still increased in cost.

My question is: What the hell happened? That many additional young people go insured and costs didn’t go down?

I know you will say premiums have increased slower, but many economists think this is due to economic reasons first of all, and second of all, there is every reason to suspect that premiums should have actually gone down if such a plan went through because of just how many of the uninsured are young. But it didn’t.

I’m game for trying another way of doing this. And if that doesn’t work, I’ll tell you what:

I am serious on this too, I will vote for Mr. Sanders, or another like him, if it turns out these methods don’t work as I believe they will.

However, if they do, will you agree to vote for people like Mr. Trump?

In no scenario however would I vote for Obama or someone like him, because he didn’t make a good plan though. And I believe that’s fair.

Like or Dislike:

0

3

Welp this thread is ruined the class dunce is here to repeat the same 100000 word rants almost exactly and claim victory.

Bob, I used to think you were smart until Captain Ron and uw let you expose yourself as a fucking lunatic and a liar. You can’t address anything anyone says with anything other than the exact same links over & over, arguments and claims of victory. Check into counseling or fuck off.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

Also:

“Welp this thread is ruined”

It’s ruined eh? Words you don’t like ruin a whole area?

This speaks volume to your personal issues in life.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

“No, not that I don’t like them, but the fact that you write way too much, post the exact same shit repetitively, and are mentally unstable leading to an eventually personal explosion & melt down.”

You sound a lot more like you’re melting down. I’m not. It would have happened by now considering I’ve been posting here since somewhere around 2007. 9 years. Also, you contradicted yourself. It’s not that you don’t like them, you just don’t like that I post too much of blah blah blah, which is, that you don’t like them.

“Also, I don’t care or take seriously the opinion about me made by an ignorant fascist that I personally believe is a rapist & without doubt a sexual assaulter by their own admission. Someone posted stats here on false rape accusations, look up the probability of it happening 2x to the same person. It’s like 2%. Fuck off.”

I am not a fascist. Name one fascist thing I have personally done? It’s impossible, because I haven’t. Now then, that means you have to name what I support that is fascist. Name it. Now. I’m sick of you using phrases that you don’t know the implications. Everything is rape, fascism, sexual assault now, because you don’t know what proper words to use, and also that you exaggerate greatly.

I have never said anything that implies I have done sexual assault. At all. I mentioned that Trump sounds like he is talking about consensual encounters. Nothing implied that he does walk up and grab women, just that he said he likes to, and women like being touched assertively. Nothing implies lack of consent. That is all I said. I also mentioned here that I have NEVER initiated contact with a woman. So it is impossible that I have said something that shows I am guilty of rape or sexual assault. I said Trump sounds like people I knew in the past, not close friends, but rather typical men. I call them friends because I don’t know what else to call them, but the fact remains, I have heard countless men say they can grab any woman they want, and it’s because they are the shiznit. Grabbing a woman by the way, even if someone did it randomly, is NOT to me sexual assault, IF the person backs off after the grab, and this is not me justifying sexual assault, it is me saying SEXUAL ASSAULT IS A SERIOUS THING it should not be trivialized and widened to include brazen inappropriate behavior. Assault implies one is intent on doing something and moves forward consistently. Men smacking each other on the rear end with towels, sexual assault by your definition, and that to me isn’t ok. I have been grabbed, I don’t accuse women of this. I had a woman who would not back off as she was going after my dick, ergo the woman I mentioned who ended up having sex with me in front of a crowd. There was a lot of pressure not to stop her due to social expectations, I mean really what man would take a woman off of him that was hot right? Would you call this then, rape? Was I raped? I’m curious, genuinely curious what you think. Do you believe a woman is wronged simply because she is grabbed? I don’t hold her any ill will. I think she was stupid, and so was I. But the point here is just how much I don’t pursue women and don’t disrespect them. And I don’t perceive touching a woman to be assault. There are some women who look for precisely that, and I have seen and dated these women too. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. I don’t demean human sexuality. Now, if someone groped a girl, started fingering her, when he just met her? That’s what you’re implying. Not a random butt grab, which is trivial, and still is not what I said or meant, when I said people I knew did the same thing. I meant someone they knew, kissing them, and later talking about it like they were the shit.

Also, there are no credible statistics for false rape, and as UW recently said, it’s 8%. Who reports false rape claims that people make in a person to person scenario? I don’t care what you say, I’ve seen it. I’m going to take a guess at least 30% is the accurate number. That may sound crazy, but I’ve seen women use this consistently. When they aren’t saying it to you, they are saying it about you, in regards to their past partners they feel bad about. So the odds you have been accused knowingly or not, are high as hell.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

Given my history, where I live, what I’ve been into, do you really think I’m this crap you and others label me as here?

I mean really, I’ve totally never been around a gay guy right? My gay Uncle included? The gay men I used to kiss at parties? The gay guy who tried to join in with me and my ex, and grabbed me down there to try and peak interest? I didn’t accuse him of sexual assault by the way. I just said no thanks. My girlfriend was rubbing down there in public, and he wanted in. I just said no. I’ve had women try the same, some I said yes, some I said no, either way, I didn’t accuse them of assault.

The hot shemale I had sex with in my 20’s?

I mean really, you know where I’m from. I grew up around liberals.

I must just hate these people so much right? Or I just disagree politically…There are some thoughts.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

“>I am not a fascist. Name one fascist thing I have personally done? It’s impossible, because I haven’t. Now then, that means you have to name what I support that is fascist.

“You have supported extreme nationalism by supporting supporting banning people from the country based on religion,”

Banning dangerous nations from coming into the nation until we can properly vet is not fascism. Securing our borders is not fascism. You are exaggerating and misusing the term. You mean to say you disagree with that protection method. It is not fascism. I believe in protecting people. Also, I have said that not allowing them here helps them as well as us. It costs a lot, about $175,000 per family to move them here, and that is just per year. If they straightened out their own situation, that is better. We cannot take in the world’s troubled people. It harms everyone. You said the same thing with Iraq during Saddam. Why didn’t we take Saddam refugees? Could it be that your leaders are trying to create hot item issues? Saddam murdered just as many, if not more, people than ISIS, and tortured people for no reason. I’m not fascist for securing borders and having common sense of what is best.

“supported mass torture,”

Wrong. I said I supported torture of known and convicted terrorists. And I said the reason I would do so, is that it would save lives. This is not supporting putting pain into enemies, which is how you are portraying it. It is supporting the people being murdered in other nations, with thousands of attacks.

“mass deportation again rooted in your nationalism,”

Nationalism is not the same as fascism, and my view points on immigration are not based on nationalism. Getting borders in control and weighing immigration based on the need of the nation is not fascist. We can’t even track what is good for the nation because of how many people come illegally. That also harms legal people who we have to guess how many to let in, and how many we can handle, based on how many known illegals are here. Deportation is needed and is good, in terms of helping people come here legally. There has to be rules and regulations on immigration to keep everyone at their best.

“supported bullshit explanations for wars,”

Name specifics, that is a general term. What aspect of Iraq (as I assume this is what you’re talking about) specifically? It is not fascist to be ok with helping another nation. Libya ringing a bell? So Iraq was fascist, and Libya was all about democracy eh?

“constantly support the classic 3 interest definition of fascism.”

Oh really? How so? That is also a generalized label. Specifics please.

“You can’t be taken seriously because you just know fascism=bad,”

What? My facts need to be weighed on their own, not based on whether or not you think I’m fascist. That is ignorance at it’s best, it is bigoted grouping to ignore facts.

“so it can’t possibly apply to you. You don’t know politics, history, or the definitions to most things you melt down over-yes,”

Again, specifics. I have said a lot of history you don’t know, in regards to the 1993 republican health care bill, the CBO Reagan budget, and other forms. I’ve talked about the trial with Jeff Sessions, the murders that Jeff helped prosecute when it came to a black murdered teen…Etc. I know history very well, but you just say cliche lines.

“you melt down here constantly with your 20 page rants.”

Long explanations are not melt downs. However you and UW cannot resist but to include Dolt in every post, and call me a rapist, fascist, etc. That is a melt down. I don’t have to reply nice, and most of the time I do. That is not a melt down, this reply is not a melt down. Also, that doesn’t make me fascist. You are doing some next level ignorance and conflation combined? Weird.

“You also made the insane claim that your religion as you view it should determine law because it would take God away if it did not,”

No. I didn’t. I never claimed this. I said laws should give rights, and should be made so that one or the other doesn’t attack the other. Laws that for example force religions to potentially not be able to charge for flying your priest of your choice (which WA state said if you charge any form of celebratory fee you can be sued for discrimination) or stop your adoption based on how you give kids, or start class warfare I don’t like. If it was about God to me, I wouldn’t support ANY gay marriage laws. However, my only issue with the law has been how religions might be controlled by the government.

“which was one of the first things the Nazis and fascists in Italy did, after going after the socialists of course, another thing you do.”

Wrong. So wrong. What they did was go after the greedy bankers. Another thing you do. It was in the speeches when Adolph first won. Go look it up, Adolph’s introductory guy was practically yelling about stopping the greedy bankers who destroyed the economy and middle class in Germany. They may have also said socialism was bad, but so did Obama, and Obama’s speeches sounded exactly like this man with regards to bankers, the only thing that was left out was the ethnicity. Do I then call Obama a fascist? No. And I am not like a nazi. You are so insane.

“More importantly you post far right propaganda in here years after it is proven wrong”

Specifics. What specifically? Also, propaganda has a definition. I’m not sure you know what it means. Go google it. You didn’t just use it properly. Also, is the CBO propaganda? You need to quit this, also, it wouldn’t make me fascists. Now I’m fascist for disagreeing with your facts and using my own? Also, name what I have been proven wrong regarding? You and UW were wrong about medicare being removed, wrong about convictions terminology on college campuses, wrong about climate change studies, claiming that over half of scientists supported the concept that global warming was a threat, even though the source he used Cook et al didn’t support that, and UW was recently wrong that Iraq is not removed from annual budgets, and I could go on. These are not small mistakes.

“& refuse to look at sources other than right wing sources and the few legitimate places they co-op or cite out of context, like your recent obsession with Ryan and his plan from the 7 years ago and refusal to accept what the current plan does – eliminate Medicare.”

Wrong. I do not only look at right wing sources, I don’t even quote or watch Fox News, and I recently used the New York times. Also, it does not eliminate Medicare. It shifts how costs are dealt with. It aims to use vouchers to cause competition to lower the costs of healthcare, these vouchers keep in mind how much the costs should be lowered. Medicare is not going to keep up if costs keep rising. It will go bankrupt, or we will have to tax so much that the whole economy will suffer. Ryan has said many times, his plan is to save Medicare. Also, the plan from 7 years ago is the same plan from today, more or less, at least the one that UW quoted. He claimed I was not talking about the new plan, but it was, for a fact, the same plan.

“Please leave, just like high school and college your routine is old and nobody here like you. Cry to the site now since free speech and anti PC are no longer important to you,idiot”

More grouping and bigoted behavior. Also your last phrase doesn’t make sense. I haven’t cried to the site, and what you just said sounds a lot like bullying. It sounds like “Leave, I’m going to bully you until you do, try and stop me.”

Grow up kid. I make mince meat of you every time. And everyone here knows it.

Like or Dislike:

1

1

And to conclude this, since the banking quote is proving hard to find, and Goebbels has a lot of speeches, and I watched it years ago, (I’ll let you find it and research yourself, I bet you have never watched these speeches, and yet you say I don’t know history)

The above quote proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Nazi party, by their own admission, was a socialist party. The only way to link them to conservatism is through social pseudo science to claim that there is a scale and that Nazis fall under fascism. That is manipulation of data I might add, which colleges do engage in, and I figure that is what will lead to the next Hitler. They will be an extreme leftist, manipulated by the education system, twisted and triggered into fear by people who said their class was oppressed, and will be pissed by the bad affects of capitalism. I have very educated reasoning for saying each of those things, that you cannot rival. It would take months to explain, literally, going over my conclusions and evidence for each of those items. So I’ll let it speak for itself and you get educated over time.

Like or Dislike:

0

1

Ok, so considering I have said I have never pursued a woman,

What specifically do you think I have done? You say I’m a serial rapist…What makes you think this? What do you think I’ve done?

Walked up and kissed a random girl? That wouldn’t be rape first of all, and I’ve already mentioned in all circumstances, I HAVE BEEN KISSED OR TOUCHED FIRST. In every, single, one.

Does this sound like a rapist? What about it does?

The fact here is that you are grouping again, is this association? The fact that I said nothing about Trump’s quote implies that he kisses and grabs random women that he hasn’t even talked to, like just walks up and grabs their pussy? See, consent is also what he said. I have said many times, it is clear he is talking about his sexual escapades, like when he was in a club and that hot girl that he was hitting on ended up sleeping with him. Not that he just grabs a girl by the pussy randomly. The line of “and they want you to” specifically moves it toward what I’m saying. Again:

YOU ARE LABELING TRUMPS WORDS, READING TOO MUCH INTO THEM, AND MISREADING THEM. Learn to use common sense.

Is it rape or sexual assault to dance with a woman, and in the middle of it feel her up, and if she feels you up back, is it wrong or rape to grab her ass?

I feel like I’m talking to a Catholic. You don’t know how sex works, is that what I am to believe? How did you first have sex?

You want to know how I did?

My girlfriend intentionally got me somewhat buzzed, and got on top of me at what she considered to be the right moment. She didn’t say do you want to, she knew that I didn’t exactly want sex until marriage at the time, and again, made the first move.

That’s how a rapist loses the virginity these days? Is that it?

You appear to be listening to only the parts of what I say that meet what you say.

Also, my friends and history does make a difference here, while you say you don’t care, who you are around affects you. I have been around liberals, I don’t hate gays, and you keep saying I do, and that I believe in religious control of them, which I don’t.

These are despicable, and lies.

Like or Dislike:

1

2

So, you are expecting the Conservative Republicans to come up with a Progressive solution? That would be refreshing.

Like or Dislike:

1

1

*New

Not no. New ideas.

Like or Dislike:

1

2

Depolar,

I know. I hope you don’t mean both including me. You mean Ron and Actu right?

Moving on:

The plans presented by republicans were a lower cost because they dealt with these issues.

I really hope we get a good republican plan, and not one from a republican trying to simply look bipartisan. Considering we have Trump…Who doesn’t do that just about ever, I’m hopeful.

Like or Dislike:

1

2

I might accept that if they get the plans they want.

However, since their plans have been blocked since the 80’s, and when they compromised in the 90’s it came back to bite them in the form of the mandate, I might not.

Do you accept that republicans have been trying to pass plans for some time?

They have tried to pass over 400 bills. You can’t keep on just blaming them that they have not been able to get healthcare reform.

https://abetterway.speaker.gov/_assets/pdf/ABetterWay-HealthCare-PolicyPaper.pdf

The biggest reason Agent and depolar get mad at you is you don’t know this. You have constantly railed on the republicans about healthcare blaming them nothing else went through, instead of the party that shut down all their ideals.

It’s time for actual accountability. Based on who blocks what, who gets what, what that what does, etc.

Not just if something doesn’t go the way someone says, which of course what they say won’t match up if they don’t get what they want, as per above.

Like or Dislike:

3

1

Psst; McCarran – Ferguson Act (1945) aka PL 15 is amendable for any needed objective.

Like or Dislike:

3

2

And my billable rate is hyuuuuge!

Like or Dislike:

1

2

DePolarBearables,

You asked, “Never thought of using a common policy, which is portable, state to state?” That is fine if it satisfies the regulations of each state. What if one state approves and another does not? Does the disapproving state lose its regulatory authority and is now forced to allow a policy that does not meet its regulations?

I am sure, if you were actually providing a valid education, I could afford the 10 pounds of fish you would charge. Unfortunately, it is even less valid than Trump University.

Like or Dislike:

1

4

Shut up Patti. This guy is an idiot who knows little about anything. Why doesn’t it disturb you the ppl who believe the same stuff you believe are clueless about everything? He doesn’t know insurance and is posting on an insurance site.

Like or Dislike:

3

0

ACTU:

Patti insulted you because you grouped agents in the same category with being ignorant. If you don’t see why that is both immoral and ignorant…Well, I don’t know what to tell you.

So are you an underwriter then? I don’t buy it. I haven’t talked with an underwriter with your type of flare.

Maybe an adjuster? Just what do you do in the insurance field? If you want to mock someone else, go ahead, give us the reason you’re smart based on your role and title, instead of debating facts.

I prefer to do the later. I hope you refuse my request and also do the later, and debate facts.

Like or Dislike:

2

1

actu adds nothing to these discussion except sidetracks guided by vulgarities and insults.

Please develop an ‘ignore’ button, IJ tech-geeks!

Like or Dislike:

0

1

DePolarBearables,

What you are suggesting already exists. What exactly would be different? Who would force each jurisdiction to agree to the policy language if they are against it?

Is there a law that is precluding the state regulators from getting together and agreeing on policy language now?

The only practical way to allow companies to sell the exact same policy in each state would be to remove regulation from the states and hand it over the federal government.

Like or Dislike:

1

2

“actu adds nothing to these discussion except sidetracks guided by vulgarities and insults.

Please develop an ‘ignore’ button, IJ tech-geeks!”

I find it funny how when you bring up the others here doing this, Ron and Confused both use the “you do it too!”

One of the three liberals here has ignored me for several years.

Two of the others, regularly call me a rapist, a fascist, a bigot, a hater of gays, etc.

Ron calls me forms of this, when he lies about my positions and claims I am against gay folks’s rights, when I have clearly explained to him that being against a badly ported law that infringes on the rights of others, is not being against gay people having rights.

This regressive left bull crap needs to be nipped in the bud.

If I were ever to join the democrat band wagon, it might be enough to deter me even if I leaned toward it.

You can’t just call everyone who has a politically different belief Hitler, a nationalist, a fascist, a rapist, bigoted, racist, homophobic, sexist, Islamophobic, and any horde of other freaking catch phrases that keep becoming the norm. Really, Islamophobic? For wanting to keep ISIS attacks out of the U.S.? It’s a legitimate concern! And we can’t weigh laws, because of this bull crap.

If I keep getting called these names for my beliefs, I’m not going to be a part of voting democrat EVER even if they follow my political virtues.

I don’t support bullying and intolerance and labels en masse! Jeff Sessions was essentially called a racist for no reason, and it stopped him from becoming a supreme court nominee. And here we have Ron stating that republicans are blocking a vote on someone they don’t like and it’s unprecedented. What a bunch of malarkey.

Like or Dislike:

2

1

Patticake,
So much angst in you. Here’s a hug. We are all Americans. Cheers and hope you had a nice Thanksgiving. Onward now to Christmas.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

My point with that post is that if I find conservative policies won’t work, I’ll vote the other way.

I’m willing to change on it. I’m willing to change on almost anything if people give good facts. It should ease your worries that no one convinces me of absurd things, you should be able to see that by now. I’m sold on the conservative ideals, and it would take a good amount of evidence to change that.

For Obama it is very telling that this opportunity existed by WAPO’s own admission, and yet they had originally announced they were leaving. This means Obama could have stopped it, if they are accurate on WAPO. The move should never have happened. And it means that all Obama had to do was simply take action. That would mean democrats have not acted to save jobs in ways that already exist and are possible, whereas Trump did. That is what I call failure.

If it isn’t accurate, that means that Trump has acted to save jobs in new ways, other than the above. And that would be a new form of success.

Either way it bodes well for Trump and poorly for democrats.

Like or Dislike:

0

2

Agent,

Either you do not know the definition of “failure” or “fact”, or maybe neither.

Like or Dislike:

0

1

Softbank is only doing it so they will be allowed to buy T-Mobile and consolidate it with their failed investment in Sprint. It will reduce competition in the market, and be bad for US consumers. It’s also an example of a company paying a relatively small amount of money to influence a politician (Trump) to receive favorable regulation and treatment later. They will probably be allowed to buy T-Mobile now, and if it comes to it they will obviously be given preferential treatment over other companies trying to buy them.

On top of that the money is from an investment lead by a group from Saudi Arabia, so it isn’t new money. But, yes, Bob will love it, because right-wing idiots are freaking out about it elsewhere.

Like or Dislike:

0

1

“Everything you put above this is nearly tin foil hat in your assumptions, and are extreme as all hell and I’m a right wing idiot?”

http://www.wsj.com/articles/softbank-group-launches-investment-fund-1476398189

This is where the money came from, idiot.

“Do you know why I flipped republican UW? I keep telling you and you’re not listening.”

Yes, because you are a racist piece of garbage, uneducated, exist in an alternate reality, and can only pretend to be intelligent. Of course, you say it is for other reasons, and because the left was soooo extreme. What that really means is when you pushed your pseudo-intellectual BS in college, you were shot down like you are here, but they didn’t allow you to go on your moronic rants. Also, because conservatives are against gays, as you are, Muslims, as you are, Blacks, as you are, elderly people, as you are, and non-rich people, as you are.

“When the liberals I am around do this, they specifically insult the people they debate with.”

I debated you on facts for months, and you said “theory doesn’t matter, only the math” until I showed you were off by magnitudes of thousands on your math, and you said “the theory was right”. Similarly, you said minimum wage increases will always kill jobs. I gave you a study showing that almost all the studies on this topic proved otherwise, and the only ones that didn’t were far less comprehensive mathematically and in sample size, and you lied about what it said, because you didn’t read it or understand it. I also provided a poll of mainstream economists run by the University of Chicago, and you said it was false, because the study was from a liberal university. It was not a study, and The University of Chicago is a far right-wing university when it comes to economics. Similar stuff happened with climate change, Iraq, your fanciful 401K numbers (where you said the vast majority of people make over the median income), and on and on. You said Trump didn’t say things and then denied video evidence. This is never ending, and yes, after all that, I came to the only logical conclusion–you are completely uneducated, know absolutely nothing about anything, and are a fraud. You lie constantly. You whined for months about political correctness being the biggest problem in the country, and then withing a week of me no longer being PC towards you, a full meltdown ensued with cries about banning. You are a joke.

No, you do not debate facts, e.g. denying video evidence of things Trump stated. Also, you are a bigot. You are against non-Christians, gays, Muslims, Arabs, Mexicans, etc. You also supported torturing innocent people going on a 30 page rant about it against Ron, and then promptly deny you ever said any such thing. You are a fucking maniac. Of course, you also said if liberals kept protesting, there would have to be a civil war, so yes, I think you are garbage, and should be treated as such.

“People like you do not debate facts and studies. ”

Except the minimum wage studies I presented, or the studies and polls about the stimulus I presented, or the studies about inflation I presented, or the studies about the labor force participation rate I presented (which you didn’t read, whined about “just the math” and linked to a blog post, even though you constantly lie and claim you don’t do that). Oh wait, you didn’t read or look into any of those studies, aside from the minimum wage one you lied about reading, because you obviously read the first paragraph.

“and then find studies that agree with them, and discredit ones that don’t. ”

Funny, because I have caught you doing that about a dozen times. I search “Subject X debunked,” and your post is usually the first or second one. And it’s rarely a study, but a BS blog post. Idiot. Liar. Fraud.

“I flipped away after seeing that. I do NOT support bullying and social interactions designed to pressure people into either agreeing or being a tyrant fascist rapist.”

Well, that is idiotic, obviously. So, by your own admission, you don’t care about facts, only civility (your definition, of course, as always), and tone. No wonder you are in a fact free world, you don’t care about data, reality, facts, only how they are presented. Guess what? The world is round, moron. Stating it like that does not change the fact.

“would not have looked into immigration this year, were it not for that push back from your side regarding it,”

I know, because you don’t care about reality; your ONLY position is being anti-liberal. That’s it. You pretend to be smart, but it boils down to that, which is why I have been able to guess your general age, geographical region, positions on about 2 dozen policies, that you were on the agency side, and that you were accused of rape multiple times. You, on the other hand, were wrong about my age, region, job, ethnicity, income, and every single thing you have guessed about me. But, because you are in a fact free world, where all that matters is going against liberals, you don’t see this as relevant to anything. Joke.

“They call them uneducated hicks for not having liberal ideals, racists, sexists, and every single name that they can.”

No. I call YOU (and people like you, like Agent, Yogi, et al) ignorant, because you are ignorant. Agent is basically a full-blown retard, nobody but you and him debates that. You say the Southern Strategy never happened. Wrong. Stupid. Uneducated. You say liberals are the real racists because Democrats in the South supported racist goals. You ignore realignment, Dixiecrats, etc. Wrong. Stupid. Ignorant. You don’t believe in any mainstream beliefs about anything as far as I can tell.

I call you racist because you deny beyond all belief any racism. You denied racism when it comes to police shooting, for example, saying a 12 year-old African American shot within 2 seconds of police pulling up must have been “trained” by his parents to resist police, because that’s what African Americans do. You are racist.

I call you sexist because you claim grabbing a woman by the p**** isn’t sexual assault, but just “getting some” and some of the finest men you know act that way. You said Trump was not being sexist when he said a woman was acting crazy, and had blood coming from, “…wherever”. You are sexist.

Of course, none of this will matter to you, because it’s rude to express your own beliefs word-for-word, and you are all for PC and censoring when it makes you look like the clown you are in reality.

You are a total mess intellectually, you cannot present facts in a debate, because you don’t know the basics about anything (see your recent Keynesian disaster, for example). You switch between only believing theory (which you don’t know) and only math, as it suits you. You are a joke, a liar, a fraud, and a clown. So, yes, I will continue treating you as such.

I look forward to your apology, or acceptance of the story, which is not debatable, which I linked, and which you will surely look into deeper. Idiot.

Like or Dislike:

2

0

Bob, I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for the liberal sites reporting the negatives of the new minimum wage. I have seen a few stories about workers asking their hours be cut because they would make too much to collect their benefits. What is an employer to do? It has to affect service if they run a smaller staff and customers not getting good service will not be back. You should get out more, by the way.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

“There has been no negative effect on jobs in Seattle due to this law. Bob of course Does not believe in data or the studies I destroyed him with on this topic, only what he personally believes and thinks he sees. What a joke.”

Kid, are you aware I just told a conservative to wait and see until the evidence comes in? I don’t just mock laws without reason, I’m a moderate tempering a conservative. You are so insane, you then insult me nonetheless.

Also, show your studies then. You did not destroy me with studies. I already broke down the flaws with your studies on the minimum wage, and you then tried to say I only talked about ancient studies and Herbert Hoover. Hoover was my version of an oddity, he was not meant for the norm. Many of the studies I have quoted you simply tried to discredit the source. Then you yourself used a questionable source, if I recall correctly, you took a liberal college or something of the like of Colorado, and said there was unanimous consensus over there, and then disregarded everything else, and said I only quote ancient studies.

The reason I’m not democrat is you. Stop being a psychopath to moderates.

This is why Trump won.

Want to stop him? Go tell people like me here you’re sorry, you will debate properly, and stop throwing out unhinged insults and accusations of racism, bigotry, sexism, rape, that they will murder, torture, are fascists, don’t know basic high school level education, etc. These are not normal insults.

Either grow up, or don’t debate here or with me.

I’ve given you enough chances UW. This is technically another, seeing as I should have just replied with “screw you”.

Like or Dislike:

0

1

I didn’t read any sarcasm in Ron’s “tip my hat” post (he previously said he’d give Trump a shot and that he’d praise him when he did good) nor did I see him insult anyone in that reply either. I don’t think we read the same post. Where was his “can’t post one thing without an insult” comment exactly?

Like or Dislike:

0

1

In case you are wondering why I am tempering my enthusiasm…

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/30/hundreds-could-still-lose-jobs-at-carriers-indianapolis-plant-despite-trump-deal.html

Like or Dislike:

2

0

Hey Bob, did you happen to notice that the Trump family was in the Trump Tower over Thanksgiving? I am sure they had a very nice Thanksgiving dinner and trimmings. Ron was “disappointed” in Trump. Well, he can stew in his own juices. Yes, it was an insult he cannot help making because he is bitter that the Progressive agenda was stopped this time. More power to the new leader. He is doing good and hasn’t even been sworn in. Stay tuned for the days after 1-20-17. This is just the beginning of dismantling the mess of the last 8 years.

Like or Dislike:

0

1

Apparently my family values are stronger than his or yours.

Holidays are for family, not business. He could easily have completed the deal on Black Friday. This is just as bad as people who shop on Thanksgiving forcing workers away from their families.

Like or Dislike:

0

1

Bob,

I singled Donald Trump out because he was bragging that working on the Carrier deal was more important than spending time with his family on Thanksgiving.

You said, “The same could be said of many politicians on many typical holidays.” Does that make it right? I will criticize anyone who puts work before family during a holiday.

In my opinion, one of the main problems with society today, is that family has fallen down the list of priorities. As the POTUS, he has an opportunity to set a better example.

Is that so much to ask?

Like or Dislike:

0

1

Bob,

Nice job misconstruing my point. If you think business comes before family, that is your opinion. I prefer to put my family first.

This next point is not directed toward you, so do not take it as such.

I find it hysterical that Conservatives like to celebrate family values, then forgive their candidates/elected officials who go against said values. Love the hypocrisy.

Like or Dislike:

1

1

I’m sorry Ron, you needed what I just gave you.

Unlike when I have railed you in the past, this insult was not because I wanted to bring you down. I did give you credit recently for looking at facts and being hopeful.

That is why instead I’m being sarcastic and calling you an asshat. To me, that would be someone who is just acting high and mighty and needs a reality check.

It’s a little different than when I’ve called you other things in purpose.

I hope that comes as a wake up call for you in the right way. And I hope you continue on the other aspects you clearly have worked on, so the conversations here can steer away from “That guy is immoral!” and instead go to “I like this plan” and “I don’t like this plan”.

One can remain civil, the other cannot.

The moment you go saying crap about morality and other issues is the moment it screws everything up.

Like or Dislike:

1

1

For example:

Does an absent father 340 days out of the year, become a good one for being there for Thanksgiving?

No on the other hand, does a father who attends Church weekly, tries his hardest, and misses Thanksgiving become a bad father?

Learn how to weigh what is important. To Catholics, and it should be people in general, practice is the key element of success. This is true in business as well, and in learning virtues. Like many your age you make the mistake of thinking, “Well, I did that once! Now I’m in the PRACTICE of morality”.

You cannot practice faith and good family values, without being in constant practice. Day to day. And here you are, taking one day, and weighing the rest.

God will hold you accountable for that by the way.

Act Catholic.

Like or Dislike:

2

0

You’re hilarious, that Tiger phrase and Cowboys made my day.

The cowboys are rockin’ the clock. It’s crazy.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

“Bob, liar, I have not called you a serial rapist, apologize.”

Yes. You and ACTU have called me an admitted sexual assault person. Keep track of what you say, or don’t say it.

“Please remember which insane rant thread you are in, or have fewer of them.”

I don’t go on insane rants, I say things you disagree with.

“I know you have claimed that Ron, Planet, Actu, Celtica and I (along with others I don’t remember or missed I’m sure) are all the same person, because you are so smart nobody could possibly disagree with you, but we aren’t In reality, instead of the endless insane conspiracy theories you create, few educated people agree with you.””

No, I haven’t. Not lately anyway. It’s very clear you are not Planet or Celtica, or Ron. The behaviors are too different. Also, stop with the “I think I’m smarter than everyone”. I have said many times I can be wrong, and I demand debates stay on facts. I have already proven where you are wrong, and you have not admitted it. I have re shown it too, unlike you who says you have proven me wrong, and then you go on to areas where either of us could be right. So that is a matter of belief. With regards to ones that are not a matter of belief: Your own study for Cook et al showed less than 50% of scientists believed that man made global warming was catastrophic. You claimed that more than half of scientists still agreed with you, when I pointed out that has been my debate for some time, you then called me a liar. (of which you called me a liar, even though it’s obvious I have said democrats are over exaggerating the consensus for some time, and I have numerous times said I don’t like that) On the Iraq war I proved that the war was included in the budget, but by a different name, and broke that out by amount, category, and year. You were wrong. On convictions, I was right. You were wrong. Stop with the character assault styles of arguing.

You’re arguing with someone who right now is saying, let’s finally see if these things work, and if they don’t, I’ll vote Bernie. So quit it.

This is really old how freaking partisan you are, and how insane you are. Not me. You.

Like or Dislike:

1

1

And then just some general numbers:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2014/09/11/sorry-obama-fans-reagan-did-better-on-jobs-and-growth/#2321cc173c92

Obama has not done well on jobs.

Note with this one, and the other, that the amount of older people up to 74 still working, is high. The baby boomers are not the reason behind the low LPR, as I said before, they as well as college students can only allow for half, and that is from a liberal source who said it. I’ll have to find it again.

This means their numbers are generous in their favor. It could very well be LESS than half which the baby boomers and college students make up.

Like or Dislike:

1

1

Bob,

I have conceded the LPR issue already. The only point I was making is that with more people retiring daily and less teenagers working than during President Reagan’s term, the number is slightly skewed. Unless you think President Obama should keep people from retiring and force teenagers to work, it is not a fair comparison.

A couple other potential factors affecting the LPR are technology and companies learning to do more with less people.

In addition, Congress was much more willing to work with President Reagan. This is a fact you cannot dispute.

Finally, whether he was for them or not, some Keynesian principles were implemented to help with the recovery in the 1980s. Notice, I did not say President Reagan was for them, just that it happened. Who knows if we would have experienced a better or worse recovery without them.

Like or Dislike:

0

3

“No. They were not. Name them. Spending increases that went through were not stimulus in nature, and also, they did not help with the recovery.”

Jesus Christ, you are uneducated, please stop. There isn’t” Keynesian spending” as you use the term. All government spending can be viewed as Keynesian spending in a downturn. Government spending in a down economy is Keynesian in nature because it increases aggregate demand. He also allowed inflation to rise by staying away from the Fed and letting Volcker work, one of his few good moves, although most say he didn’t understand what he was doing, but trusted Volcker and thought it would be mostly irrelevant. By the 4th year of each of their presidencies real per capita government spending had increased by 14.4% under Reagan and only 6.4% under Obama. I know you adhere to Bob Math, but Reagan’s is twice as high. Much was due to state spending, which was through revenue sharing from the federal government.

That’s not relevant to my point though, which is you do not have a freaking clue. You think Keynesian economics, the economics widely accepted as mainstream, is bad, therefore Reagan couldn’t have done it, since he’s great, so you have to create a new definition. Please go away, or crack a few books.

You are debating an uniformed, uneducated, insane person, Ron. Also there’s no point conceding the LPR (not the actual abbreviation) because it’s mostly due to younger workers and an aging population, along with pet people permanently pushed out of the workforce during the Republican crash of 08. Look up the work by the Fed, and others in the composition effect. Bob has cited a non-economist adding numbers and therefore thinks he has proven his theory, he hasn’t, and can’t, because he does not understand basic economics.

Also, Bob, genius, please learn how to use affect and effect correctly, kiddo.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

“Damn, get owned Bob. Bye bye, as always vanish when crushed and then claim victory. Dumbass.”

That is not what I do. At points when articles get too old and an argument is too long I just don’t come back.

UW has not owned anyone. He keeps saying the same flawed things. I don’t have to repeat myself indefinitely.

And with the “get owned Bob” this shows the only thing that matters to you is “winning” like Charlie Sheen. I however care about debating.

This argument here is pointless.

Like or Dislike:

0

1

“UW has not owned anyone. He keeps saying the same flawed things. I don’t have to repeat myself indefinitely.”

Actually you just got destroyed regarding your lack of knowledge about Keynes and economics. Of course you don’t ever think you can do wrong, hence your substandard education and knowledge.

“I know English, and you insert unnecessary comas for effect and make mistakes all the time. I however don’t derail with this tactic.”

Nobody cares about random grammatical errors online, maybe Actu is different, but I don’t care. However, you routinely have massive errors in basic vocabulary and word usage.

“This is not a good economic affect.”

“[…]depending on how long it takes to get these plans going and if they have affects, to democrat.”
“[…] their class oppressed, and will be passed by the bad affects of capitalism. ”

This goes on and on with you. You don’t know the difference between “affect” and “effect”. Again, I don’t really care but it can be a signal for intelligence and education. But, will you admit these are wrong?

“Except, when you are making a paragraph with a concept, ”

” I get to say what my words mean, m’kay?”

No, … Actually words have predetermined meanings. You seem to think you can decide what words mean, what math is, what math should count, what decades worth of science should be discarded, what mainstream economics and history should be discarded in favor of blog posts by people with philosophy degrees. But, you aren’t knowledgeable on ANY of it, and aren’t qualified to make those decisions. The debate you claim you engage in is a farce; you present a study you agree with, that does away with decades of other studies, and has been debunked all over, and then stick to it forever. You are a dolt. You still don’t eveb understand my claims about the Cook study, and obviously did not read the study I linked, just like you didn’t read the links in your bs link. Your study contsined massive mathematical errors. It isn’t credible in any way, shape or form, and as I pointed out then you were not presenting hundreds of studies, you were presenting artivles based on the one debunked study,dolt. You are a joke.

There is very little case for a housing bubble. For one thing, idiot, prices rising slowly for 8 years would naturally result in higher prices, closer to previous prices. But, as you surely don’t knew, because your idiotic Reddit links didn’t tell you, there is more to a bubble than price.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-18/it-s-not-a-housing-bubble-it-s-just-expensive

But you still ignore almost all economic research and claim the crash was due to the CRA, an extreme, fringe, completely disproven podition taken only by uninformed right-wing idiots, as always.

Do you admit you used those words incorrectly?

Like or Dislike:

1

1

Bob, perhaps we should give a “Come to Jesus” meeting with some of the liberals on this site.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

Yeah but they can have a really poor attitude.

I still have a bitter taste in my mouth after that melt down.

Like or Dislike:

0

1

I’m calling it, this guy is dumber then Agent.

Like or Dislike:

0

1

http://blogs.wsj.com/pharmalot/2015/07/23/u-s-could-save-up-to-16b-if-medicare-part-d-negotiated-prices-paper/

If you think the government can negotiate lower prices for auto parts, resources, wages, materials, etc., but not drug prices you are an absolute idiot. You don’t believe in economies of scale, yet another refusal to believe mainstream economics, and don’t believe the largest single purchaser of items cannot get decreased costs through bulk purchasing, even though it happens everywhere else. Ignore the link, dolt.

As for you cbo letter, again it’s not a comprehensive study, as always with you, you don’t seem to get what it says, because it’s certainly not what you claim, and most of all, kiddo, it is a Democrat trying to look into what you claim Republicans haven’t blocked.

Do you admit you used the words cited in my previous post incorrectly?

Are you on the autism spectrum?

I’m asking these every comment until you answer, I think others should too.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

“Paul Ryan is trying to further use vouchers in the same way.”

“No, you fucking moron, he isn’t, stop saying this. As I have shown repeatedly and you have ignored, as usual, is that he is eliminating Medicare and replacing it with a voucher system allowing people to purchase private insurance. The vouchers are tied to CPI instead of health care inflation, and with conservative estimates will reduce buying power, ie increase real costs by about 40% in 10 years. The cost control measures are bullshit. They are unspecified tax cuts, reductions in overhead (they can’t control that), and other tax loopholes that aren’t named, and in reality don’t exist.”

You just repeated the plan. Giving vouchers is about the delivery, the delivery is intended to increase competition, and to lower costs. Start paying attention, and stop being an idiot. I did not ignore what you said. I heard it just fine. Lowering the amounts paid will happen, or taxes will go way up, as medicare cannot exist as it does now. We either raise taxes a ton, or we find a way to bring down costs. The goal of the vouchers is to bring down the costs of care, in line with the reductions that need to happen. As Ryan has said, his goal is to preserve what will not be around for future generations.

“You haven’t proven me wrong 4 times, you have repeated your misunderstandings.”

Yes, I have. You said that the Iraq wars were not counted in the budget deficits. I proved you wrong. You said that over half of scientists still agreed that man made warming was catastrophic. You were were wrong, by your own study Cook et al. Look at the numbers of it. You said that me using convictions was wrong, then I gave you the link that used the terminology. You were wrong. Now, you have said that I was referring to an earlier plan, when I was not. Your very link was dated April 2011 this time around, your summary, and mine was December 2011. Your very summary includes the voucher plan I’m talking about. How can I be wrong and talking about another plan, while also being right that medicare is going to vouchers and that will destroy everything? You are the one who has a mental disorder. You keep flipping back and forth. It is either mentally insane or a brilliant tactic to play on those here who will forget. I don’t. You have numerous times said Medicare will be removed, then when I say the goal of the vouchers is to bring down insurance costs, you then say I’m talking about another plan to discredit me. I then ask for the plan, but you don’t give it, then you say you have given it numerous times, the next time you bring it up, and that I don’t listen to the CPI and insert random facts that aren’t relevant to whether or not the vouchers will bring down costs in line with the payments.

“Do you have a form of autism?”

Do you?

“Do you admit to using those words incorrectly?”

Which words? Convictions? I used the word correctly as it applied. When the school decides that if you are 50.01% likely to have committed rape, they are mandated to convict guilty (separate from civil or state courts) to remove you from the school. The terminology was correct.

Like or Dislike:

1

0

Hey Andrew and Josh. Are you monitoring the hateful speech and swearing, name calling from the now infamous UW? This guy is a maniac and should be taken off the blog.

Like or Dislike:

1

2

“I don’t have to agree with your links or concepts. Not agreeing does not make me a dolt. “

Yes, you have to agree with the concept of economies of scale, or show a reason decades of research in economics should be overturned. Again, you are far outside the mainstream, and refuse to even debate the points you do not agree with. Yes, you can hold whatever position you believe, but no, it does not make them true. If you hold stupid positions, you are stupid. If you do not agree with concepts because they disprove your philosophy, as you do, you are a dolt.

“ The government does not know much about medical costs,”

As always, wrong. They know a ton about it, because they have by far the largest studies on it, and through Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, etc., have a lot of data on it. You are clueless.

“Republicans have blocked government control of price. They have not blocked methods of bringing down price, or as I call it price controls, but the method of how is different”

BS. This is patently false, an outright lie. They have blocked the negotiation of prices for government purchases of drugs, which would drastically reduce the cost for people using those programs. NOT widespread price controls, which are setting price floors and/or ceilings. YOU DON”T KNOW ANYTHING.

“You don’t know how to speak the same language as me, and so you scream and insult. “

I speak English. As I have proven, you barely speak English. But what you are referring to is something anybody should be proud of, which is not being stuck in your fantasy world, where you decide what words mean, decide what math counts, and set aside all science and proven economics to suit your argument. I can’t say it enough, but just because you say something does not mean it is true.

““it isn’t a comprehensive study” is your go to when the CBO tells you that something you said is a big deal, is not. “

No, it is my “go to” in this case when you are claiming a plan that Republicans killed in Congress will drop medical prices across the nation by 20%, even though the study was no comprehensive, and as I’ve noted assumed Ryan’s tax cuts would work as stated, his non-specified loopholes would be fixed and efficient as he claimed, and that they would stay closed. It’s preposterous, if it were me saying the same thing you would lose your mind and comment for 1,000 pages. Grow up, get intellectually consistent, and crack a book. Just because something is in a study doesn’t make it true. There is a huge amount of literature on the subject, almost all of it disagrees with your retarded claims.

“Do you admit you used the words cited in my previous post incorrectly?”

I did not use the words in your previous post incorrectly.

“ You keep asking the question in such a way as if I can track what you’re talking about in 50 posts. WHAT TERM DID I USE INCORRECTLY?”

You cannot say you didn’t know which terms, and then deny using them incorrectly. You are an incoherent mess, and at your core, completely dishonest.

““Are you on the autism spectrum?”

We have a serious problem here. This would be considered harassment to most people.”

IMO, you are, and I want to know because I do not want to debate a person who is as unstable as you if it is potentially due to a mental disorder or disability. I do not think there is anything wrong with the question, as it is not something that would be a personal fault. You think anything against you is harassment, and won’t admit to basic errors.

“And regardless of even that, focusing on terms on a post, instead of concept, is insane”

Except for the 6 months where every comment you made screamed “just the math” even if it was out of context.

“Democrats insist the government do it.”

No, you are too blinded by your partisanship to even consider anything logically. This would result in lower prices to the drugs negotiated by Medicare, not price controls, that’s not debatable. You don’t know what price controls are. The private market would be free to pay higher prices,there would be no set prices, and companies could refuse to sell to them, but mostly wouldn’t because it would result in them buying a massive amount somewhere else, and kill their market share, hurting them in other areas. You don’t understand markets, economics, basic economics terms, or seemingly anything else. No wonder you align with Agent.

“ You were wrong about me using the wrong word for convictions”

No, I was not. But, by your standard it would not matter. You were saying they were “convicting” students on campus and kicking them off, this is false, and it’s not debatable, aside from the Fact Lord Bob declared from the Heavens this is one of the words that has his meaning. You were using it saying they were convicting them and kicking them out, blah blah blah. You only cared because it affected (not effected) accused rapists.

“You have used the incorrect terms, and you have accused me of it preemptively as a method of ad hominem attack,”

You don’t know what an ad hominen is. When a person admittedly uses their own definitions for words, and denies commonly accepted definitions exist, as well as lying about things confirmed by evidence, previous statements, and misquotes people, quotes them out of context, etc. their words and honesty are in fact relevant to many arguments, and therefore, by the accepted definition of the term, not ad hominen attacks.

“Funny. You keep saying I have mentioned an earlier bill. What do you notice about your link above? It’s from April 2011. My link from politifact was from Dec 2011.”

The bill I am referring to is the one you constantly cite, which you would know if you were literate enough to put multiple sentences together and consider past facts. Your letter from the CBO, which I clearly referenced, is from early 2010. Furthermore, what I was talking about here was the FACT that you routinely cite one NYT article about Reagan from the first year he was in office, ignoring the fact he was in office 7 more years.

“Do you admit that you were wrong about Iraq costs?”

No, again. Where is the 2002 part of the budget that accounted for the 2009, 2010, etc. costs of the Iraq War? Get on board the “theory” train you whine about. You are clueless.

“Do you admit that Cook et al says less than half of scientists agree man made global warming will be catastrophic?”

Noe. Cite in the study where it says that. The study I referenced DID NOT EVEN LOOK AT THAT. I didn’t even debate that in the thread about this.

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2016/06/02/410761.htm/?comments

You started claiming that 97% didn’t agree climate change was real, went off on that forever. I didn’t address whether it would be catastrophic here. YOU DID. And, this is why I believe in my own personal opinion you have Asperger’s or autism, you have not been able to focus on ANYTHING else, as always. You have skipped the entire relevant debate, because you cannot stop focusing on something that wasn’t being debated.

I do believe it will be catastrophic, as do most economists, but you do not, and nothing will ever change your mind, until the right-wing updates their talking points. You clearly subscribe to the idiotic theory that it is like a basket of land, and all the agricultural land just shifts north as it warms, and as some areas become less abundant other new areas become equally abundant and it evens out. That ignores the deaths and displacements along coastlines, new deserts, etc. but you believe that.

You do not read the studies people present. You just search for right-wing sites debunking them, and paste those links after scanning them. You are a joke. You clearly didn’t even read the Cook study, or you would have at least a vague idea what was in it, and wouldn’t be here embarrassing yourself. Can you even admit you didn’t read it, or did you just not comprehend it at all?

Here is the study for you to ignore again:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

1) Do you have a form of autism? I do not, since you asked, even though you feel it is harassment, meaning by your definition you admit to harassing me. 2A) Do you admit the Cook debate was not about how catastrophic it would be? 2B) Do you admit the Cook paper does not address how many believe it would be catastrophic? 3) Where is the debt for Obama-era Iraq spending in the Bush budgets? Answer these directly, as I did your questions or I won’t respond again.