TrueMetis Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 This is the worst game of one upmanship ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rippounet Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 1 hour ago, Jace, Basilissa said: I thought Herman Cain was the "the rent is too damn high" guy. Herman Cain had the most fantastic political ad' ever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwawPMSJins I don't know what's worse: the smoking, Cain's predatory smile, or the Branch music. What I do know is that the combination is a true work of genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centrist Simon Steele Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 I don't know much about Omar, but every time I read about her, it's fairly xenophobic. I know this is a Fox news commentator, but to question if she is American enough because she was saying that not all Muslims should be punished for 9/11? I know there's not a line anymore, but...isn't there a tiny, almost invisible line? Somewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 25 minutes ago, Simon Steele said: I don't know much about Omar, but every time I read about her, it's fairly xenophobic. I know this is a Fox news commentator, but to question if she is American enough because she was saying that not all Muslims should be punished for 9/11? I know there's not a line anymore, but...isn't there a tiny, almost invisible line? Somewhere? Nope. And if there's one thing that's for certain it's that the Right will dogpile on and villify women of color, non-christians, and immigrants*. Omar checks all three of those boxes. *Not a comprehensive list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 48 minutes ago, Rippounet said: Herman Cain had the most fantastic political ad' ever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwawPMSJins I don't know what's worse: the smoking, Cain's predatory smile, or the Branch music. What I do know is that the combination is a true work of genius. That... wow. Wow. Just incredible. Wow. Did they pay money for that ad or get a kid with a flip phone to direct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted April 10, 2019 Share Posted April 10, 2019 51 minutes ago, Rippounet said: Herman Cain had the most fantastic political ad' ever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwawPMSJins I don't know what's worse: the smoking, Cain's predatory smile, or the Branch music. What I do know is that the combination is a true work of genius. Still probably not a top five Herman Cain moment. I maintain that this one takes the cake: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUg8S8_zRR0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted April 10, 2019 Author Share Posted April 10, 2019 So pro-life yet so eager to kill. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/04/10/texas-abortion-bill-would-allow-death-penalty-used-against-women/3426330002/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A True Kaniggit Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said: Still probably not a top five Herman Cain moment. I maintain that this one takes the cake: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUg8S8_zRR0 Without looking. The Pokémon song? Edit: Booyah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 I'm really glad Sanders addressed this because I've been puzzled by his opposition to ending the Senate filibuster. The problem with his explanation though is he is talking about ending the filibuster. It is not like the Republicans will decide that Bernie has beat them and just give up. The Repubs we know and love will immediately seek revenge at the first opportunity. It will be the end of the filibuster in the Senate. I don't have a problem with that, I just wish he'd admit to that. This plan does seem a lot better than his old plan though. Which was to use the bully pulpit of the President to get his bills passed. Quote Sanders discussed his plan in an interview with HuffPost on Saturday, stating, “I do think that every piece of legislation that I am fighting for can be passed with good legislative processes, including budget reconciliation.” Under reconciliation, a piece of legislation must meet certain fiscal conditions to bypass the customary 60-vote threshold. A bill passed under those rules is forbidden from increasing the federal deficit outside a 10-year window, for example. Democrats used reconciliation to pass much of Obamacare, and Republicans did so as well to pass their recent tax cuts into law. Sanders’ plan hinges on overruling the Senate parliamentarian, the person in charge of figuring out whether a piece of legislation meets the conditions attached to reconciliation. Given the degree of its impact on issues like health care and taxing and spending, Medicare for All would likely face a very difficult time meeting those rules. Therefore, Sanders says he would instruct his future vice president ― who also serves as the president of the Senate ― to overrule the chamber’s parliamentarian and allow the bill to pass with a simple majority. Bernie Sanders Explains How He’d Get ‘Medicare-For-All’ Passed In Congress It involves blowing up an arcane procedural rule in the Senate known as reconciliation. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-medicare-for-all-filibuster_n_5cae6ec4e4b09a1eabf77297 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 I know, price controls are communism and lead to men in bad uniforms caving in the skulls of your children with rifle butts. But if this were the UK or Australia would they really just sit by while these ghouls profit off the suffering of your country folk? It seems like a pretty American problem to have Diabetes patients suffer so that some Martin Shkreli can increase his profit margins. Quote According to the pharmacy benefit managers testifying before Congress Tuesday, it’s the insulin manufacturers companies who are driving up the cost of the drug. At another congressional hearing Wednesday, pharmaceutical company executives blamed pharmacy benefit managers for helping to inflate prices, and boasted about their financial assistance programs as solutions to the access crisis. The blame game involves many fingers pointing in many directions, but make no mistake: What’s driving up insulin costs is that drug companies have raised prices because they can. Walmart’s $25 insulin can’t fix the diabetes drug price crisis The US chain offers a low-cost option, but it’s far from ideal for all patients. https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/4/10/18302238/insulin-walmart-relion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 Yeah if I ever lose my health insurance I'm pretty much going to die from my diabetes. Fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 I have told people before that if they have no insurance come up to Canada for a weekend holiday and buy a three month or four or six month supply of insulin. The cost saving will pay for your vacation and let you pocket the rest. I gather you do not have to have a prescription to buy insulin, I understand, because it is used by so many people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 4 hours ago, Rippounet said: I don't know what's worse: the smoking, Cain's predatory smile, or the Branch music. What I do know is that the combination is a true work of genius. The creepy white dude smoking the cig is what makes that ad genius. 1 hour ago, Martell Spy said: I'm really glad Sanders addressed this because I've been puzzled by his opposition to ending the Senate filibuster. I'm against abolishing the filibuster, but what you quoted doesn't have too much to do with that. Reconciliation can be stretched in a lot of ways. The premise the article takes - that the parliamentarian would be unprecedented in allowing a Medicare for All bill into the process - is empirically incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 Here in NY you definitely need a prescription, at least for the kind I buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 47 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: I have told people before that if they have no insurance come up to Canada for a weekend holiday and buy a three month or four or six month supply of insulin. The cost saving will pay for your vacation and let you pocket the rest. I gather you do not have to have a prescription to buy insulin, I understand, because it is used by so many people. I used to buy a drug on websites from Canada in order to save money. It was this drug that doctors love to prescribe, but never actually worked for me, and it was hundreds of dollars a month if you bought in the U.S. This was around 2008. I eventually figured out how to buy it even cheaper from India. Those damn Canadian capitalists were gouging me. The stuff never did work for me and I eventually quit taking it. All the websites required you to upload a prescription, BTW to buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 20 minutes ago, DMC said: The creepy white dude smoking the cig is what makes that ad genius. I'm against abolishing the filibuster, but what you quoted doesn't have too much to do with that. Reconciliation can be stretched in a lot of ways. The premise the article takes - that the parliamentarian would be unprecedented in allowing a Medicare for All bill into the process - is empirically incorrect. That's good to know, but do you expect Republicans to act reasonably in response to such a move? I imagine they will act like persecuted white male Christians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 8 minutes ago, Triskele said: On the filibuster: Never really thought about this before, but what if the rule was changed not to abolish altogether but to change from 60 to 55? 60 is just so hard to get to but 55 still gives it a bit of a feeling of not being purely something that can be undone every new Congress. I thought about this, but why would the Republicans not just then lower it to 50 next time they are in power? I think they totally would the second they determine the Democrats have moved on the filibuster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 9 minutes ago, Triskele said: That's a fair question. I wasn't thinking of it so much in that context but just about whether the problem with the filibuster isn't the policy itself per se but just at what level it's set at. I mean, what if it was 80 instead of 60? Everyone would see it as obviously a joke of a policy. But the reality in the ground is that setting it at 60 is not really so different from 80. I think the answer is that it was used in a period where there was a lot less polarization and bipartisan deals were more common. I think no one really predicted such a partisan era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 21 minutes ago, Martell Spy said: That's good to know, but do you expect Republicans to act reasonably in response to such a move? I imagine they will act like persecuted white male Christians. The GOP reaction to anything the Democrats do is always to act like Mel Gibson Jesus. So no, I'm not concerned by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 30 minutes ago, Triskele said: Never really thought about this before, but what if the rule was changed not to abolish altogether but to change from 60 to 55? Sorry for the double post but didn't see this. I'm entirely in favor of changing it to 55. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.