Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    You just can't make this stuff up.

     

    http://siouxfallsbusinessjournal.argusleader.com/article/20131004/UPDATES/310040047/S-D-officials-object-feds-barring-visitors-from-highway-viewing-areas-near-Mount-Rushmore

     

    Again, I ask:  For an agency that is supposedly shut down, they certainly have enough time and effort to do stupid things like that for president "Stompy Feet".

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    According to the article:

    The cones were down again Friday as a blizzard hit the Black Hills and plows needed access to the roads, Johnson said. He said the state would be monitoring to see whether the cones are put back along viewing areas.“Once the snow’s off the ground, we’re going to be keeping an eye on how the cones go up,” Johnson said.

     


    As for closure of national facilities, what part of "shutdown" did the GOPers forcing a shutdown not understand? "Down"? Or "shut"?

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    According to the article:

    The cones were down again Friday as a blizzard hit the Black Hills and plows needed access to the roads, Johnson said. He said the state would be monitoring to see whether the cones are put back along viewing areas.“Once the snow’s off the ground, we’re going to be keeping an eye on how the cones go up,” Johnson said.

     


    As for closure of national facilities, what part of "shutdown" did the GOPers forcing a shutdown not understand? "Down"? Or "shut"?



    Shutting down an unmanned senic view on a federal highway?

    What part about doing something just to spite people don't you get?????

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to skeeter20's comment:


    Shutting down an unmanned senic view on a federal highway?



    Maybe if I bold it.

     

    According to the article:

    The cones were down again Friday as a blizzard hit the Black Hills and plows needed access to the roads, Johnson said. He said the state would be monitoring to see whether the cones are put back along viewing areas.“Once the snow’s off the ground, we’re going to be keeping an eye on how the cones go up,” Johnson said.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    Holy Jellybeans...

    What a blockhead...no doubt carved from some of the same granite as Abe & Co....

     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    [QUOTE]
    Shutting down an unmanned senic view on a federal highway?

     

     



    Maybe if I bold it.

     

     

    According to the article:

    The cones were down again Friday as a blizzard hit the Black Hills and plows needed access to the roads, Johnson said. He said the state would be monitoring to see whether the cones are put back along viewing areas.“Once the snow’s off the ground, we’re going to be keeping an eye on how the cones go up,” Johnson said.

    [/QUOTE]

    Feds trying to close a highway scenic overlook and the Governor has said no you won't.

    They'll be monitoring the cones because they were taken down because snow was on hte way and the plow would have flung them into the woods.

    Interesting article by Krauthammer makes reference to more US Park Service foolishness.

    http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/opinion/krauthammer-who-shut-down-mount-rushmore/article_5aa744a4-963b-520f-ab95-e77c5ec84b2b.html

     click on link for whole stroy, but I found the last few paragraphs the most telling of the absurdity of the Dem indignant holy then thou view.

    ...............................................

    The Democrats insist they welcomed contributing ideas from Republicans. Rubbish. Republicans proposed that insurance be purchasable across state lines. They got nothing. They sought serious tort reform. They got nothing.

    Moreover, the administration was clearly warned. Republican Scott Brown ran in the most inhospitable of states, Massachusetts, on the explicit promise to cast the deciding vote blocking Obamacare. It was January 2010, the height of the debate. He won. Reid ignored this unmistakable message of popular opposition and conjured a parliamentary maneuver — reconciliation — to get around Brown.

    Nothing illegal about that. Nothing illegal about ramming it through without a single opposition vote. Just totally contrary to the modern American tradition — and the constitutional decency — of undertaking major social revolutions with only bipartisan majorities. Having stuffed Obamacare down the throats of the GOP and the country, Democrats are now paying the price.

    It’s the Democrats who have mocked the very notion of settled law. It’s the Democrats who voted down the reopening of substantial parts of the government. It’s the Democrats who gave life to a spontaneous, authentic, small-government opposition — a.k.a. the tea party — with their unilateral imposition of a transformational agenda during the brief interval when they held a monopoly of power.

    That interval is over. The current unrest is the residue of that hubris.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    "Republicans proposed that insurance be purchasable across state lines. They got nothing."


    Rubbish.

    1. Insurance already is "purchaseable across state lines"; what you mean is "purchaseable across state lines without the insurance having to meet the purchasee states' requirements.

    2. What you mean overrides "states rights" to set minimum requirements for insurance within the state.

    3. Exchanges facilitate this: Instead of meeting individual states requirements, it needs to meet one set of federal requirements.

     

     

     

    "They sought serious tort reform. They got nothing."

    1. What serious tort reform? What proposals?

    2. This should be a matter for each state, no?

    3. Tort reform would not have much of any effect on the cost of premiums, at least, that's what those who looked into it have said. Measures to discourage frivolous suits are welcome, but it's usually hard to tell what a frivolous suit is until the facts come out. I think a lot of people repeat "tort reform" without the slightest clue of what they're talking about. All they're saying is "lawyer bad! RAWR!"

     

     

     

    So let's review. One of the two suggestions is in Obamacare. The other wouldn't help nor is there anything from Republicans passing a tort reform bill now.

    Republicans pledged to block everything Obama would do in order to break him before he even took office, proceeded to do just that, and then complained that Obama wouldn't talk to them.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    "Republicans proposed that insurance be purchasable across state lines. They got nothing."


    Rubbish.

    1. Insurance already is "purchaseable across state lines"; what you mean is "purchaseable across state lines without the insurance having to meet the purchasee states' requirements.

    2. What you mean overrides "states rights" to set minimum requirements for insurance within the state.

    3. Exchanges facilitate this: Instead of meeting individual states requirements, it needs to meet one set of federal requirements.

     

     

     

    "They sought serious tort reform. They got nothing."

    1. What serious tort reform? What proposals?

    2. This should be a matter for each state, no?

    3. Tort reform would not have much of any effect on the cost of premiums, at least, that's what those who looked into it have said. Measures to discourage frivolous suits are welcome, but it's usually hard to tell what a frivolous suit is until the facts come out. I think a lot of people repeat "tort reform" without the slightest clue of what they're talking about. All they're saying is "lawyer bad! RAWR!"

     

     

     

    So let's review. One of the two suggestions is in Obamacare. The other wouldn't help nor is there anything from Republicans passing a tort reform bill now.

    Republicans pledged to block everything Obama would do in order to break him before he even took office, proceeded to do just that, and then complained that Obama wouldn't talk to them.



    Well big picture I have a problem with ACA because it over rides state's rights.  Mass did it right, it was a local decision now imposed nationally.

    Nice that you drop any discussion on the passage process, yes there is untold resentment driving the issue.

    Remember is was Obama to told the GOP and McCain to lump it that he won.

    As far as lawyers go; you industry has a tough time when Attorney's like Allred who chase literally ambulances and go looking to defend a thug biker who ended up partially paralyzed due to his own involvement with a group that was out of control and terrorized the Lien family in their Range Rover.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]
    Shutting down an unmanned senic view on a federal highway?

     

     

     

     

     

     



    Maybe if I bold it.

     

     

     

     

    According to the article:

    The cones were down again Friday as a blizzard hit the Black Hills and plows needed access to the roads, Johnson said. He said the state would be monitoring to see whether the cones are put back along viewing areas.“Once the snow’s off the ground, we’re going to be keeping an eye on how the cones go up,” Johnson said.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Feds trying to close a highway scenic overlook and the Governor has said no you won't.

     

     

    They'll be monitoring the cones because they were taken down because snow was on hte way and the plow would have flung them into the woods.

    Interesting article by Krauthammer makes reference to more US Park Service foolishness.

    http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/opinion/krauthammer-who-shut-down-mount-rushmore/article_5aa744a4-963b-520f-ab95-e77c5ec84b2b.html

     click on link for whole stroy, but I found the last few paragraphs the most telling of the absurdity of the Dem indignant holy then thou view.

    ...............................................

    The Democrats insist they welcomed contributing ideas from Republicans. Rubbish. Republicans proposed that insurance be purchasable across state lines. They got nothing. They sought serious tort reform. They got nothing.

    Moreover, the administration was clearly warned. Republican Scott Brown ran in the most inhospitable of states, Massachusetts, on the explicit promise to cast the deciding vote blocking Obamacare. It was January 2010, the height of the debate. He won. Reid ignored this unmistakable message of popular opposition and conjured a parliamentary maneuver — reconciliation — to get around Brown.

    Nothing illegal about that. Nothing illegal about ramming it through without a single opposition vote. Just totally contrary to the modern American tradition — and the constitutional decency — of undertaking major social revolutions with only bipartisan majorities. Having stuffed Obamacare down the throats of the GOP and the country, Democrats are now paying the price.

    It’s the Democrats who have mocked the very notion of settled law. It’s the Democrats who voted down the reopening of substantial parts of the government. It’s the Democrats who gave life to a spontaneous, authentic, small-government opposition — a.k.a. the tea party — with their unilateral imposition of a transformational agenda during the brief interval when they held a monopoly of power.

    That interval is over. The current unrest is the residue of that hubris.

     

    [/QUOTE]



     

    Even before ACA insurers were allowed to sell anywhere in the country  ... as long as they met that states legal requirements. Now the party of 'states rights' wants the fed to nullify that state's right to regulate a business within it's own borders.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No they really want to nullify a Federal law and let it be handled by the states, like Mass.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]
    Shutting down an unmanned senic view on a federal highway?

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    Maybe if I bold it.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    According to the article:

    The cones were down again Friday as a blizzard hit the Black Hills and plows needed access to the roads, Johnson said. He said the state would be monitoring to see whether the cones are put back along viewing areas.“Once the snow’s off the ground, we’re going to be keeping an eye on how the cones go up,” Johnson said.

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Feds trying to close a highway scenic overlook and the Governor has said no you won't.

     

     

     

     

    They'll be monitoring the cones because they were taken down because snow was on hte way and the plow would have flung them into the woods.

    Interesting article by Krauthammer makes reference to more US Park Service foolishness.

    http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/opinion/krauthammer-who-shut-down-mount-rushmore/article_5aa744a4-963b-520f-ab95-e77c5ec84b2b.html

     click on link for whole stroy, but I found the last few paragraphs the most telling of the absurdity of the Dem indignant holy then thou view.

    ...............................................

    The Democrats insist they welcomed contributing ideas from Republicans. Rubbish. Republicans proposed that insurance be purchasable across state lines. They got nothing. They sought serious tort reform. They got nothing.

    Moreover, the administration was clearly warned. Republican Scott Brown ran in the most inhospitable of states, Massachusetts, on the explicit promise to cast the deciding vote blocking Obamacare. It was January 2010, the height of the debate. He won. Reid ignored this unmistakable message of popular opposition and conjured a parliamentary maneuver — reconciliation — to get around Brown.

    Nothing illegal about that. Nothing illegal about ramming it through without a single opposition vote. Just totally contrary to the modern American tradition — and the constitutional decency — of undertaking major social revolutions with only bipartisan majorities. Having stuffed Obamacare down the throats of the GOP and the country, Democrats are now paying the price.

    It’s the Democrats who have mocked the very notion of settled law. It’s the Democrats who voted down the reopening of substantial parts of the government. It’s the Democrats who gave life to a spontaneous, authentic, small-government opposition — a.k.a. the tea party — with their unilateral imposition of a transformational agenda during the brief interval when they held a monopoly of power.

    That interval is over. The current unrest is the residue of that hubris.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]



     

     

     

    Even before ACA insurers were allowed to sell anywhere in the country  ... as long as they met that states legal requirements. Now the party of 'states rights' wants the fed to nullify that state's right to regulate a business within it's own borders.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No they really want to nullify a Federal law and let it be handled by the states, like Mass.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    No, any insurer can sell in any state they wish as long as they are properly registered within that state. That was the law before ACA and it is still the law after ACA. In fact sates are setting up compacts to allow easier acces for insurers in those states.

     

    The wingnuts idea is to force states to accept any and all insurers without regard to that states own regulation. That is a direct violation of states rights.

    You've got is bass ackwards.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Their just supporting free choice; is that really a bad thing?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    No they really want to nullify a Federal law and let it be handled by the states, like Mass.


    Actually, they want to nullify Obama's entire presidency.  But we knew that, because they told us so at the beginning.

    They ARE the "nullification party", after all....

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    Their just supporting free choice; is that really a bad thing?


    That's like saying people have "free choice" to live where they want...

    ...never mind if they can afford it or not, right...?

     

     

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Their just supporting free choice; is that really a bad thing?

     

     


    That's like saying people have "free choice" to live where they want...

    ...never mind if they can afford it or not, right...?

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    How is purchasing the insurance you want and can afford a bad thing.

    The same goes for where you want to live, sure I'd love to live on the ocean but it isn't going to happen and I don't expect the government to make it so for me.

    I am looking forward to moving to the the Carolinas on the intercoastal waterway at sometime.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    As far as lawyers go; you industry has a tough time when Attorney's like Allred who chase literally ambulances and go looking to defend a thug biker who ended up partially paralyzed due to his own involvement with a group that was out of control and terrorized the Lien family in their Range Rover.



    I am not a personal injury attorney. That's another lazy smear common amongst the public: applying the image of the dirtiest cheap TV ad lawyer and projecting it onto all lawyers.

    Nevermind. If you do know of any attorneys who chase ambulances, you should report them to the BBO for discipline. It's unethical.

     

     

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Well big picture I have a problem with ACA because it over rides state's rights.  Mass did it right, it was a local decision now imposed nationally.

    [/QUOTE]

    OK, but I can only respond to what you post, and that's what I did...

    But on that note: some things are so intertwined with interstate commerce and the national economy that it's better for federal government to take a role.

    And of course, Obamacare isn't a complete takeover of healthcare or a complete takeover of states' ability to regulate insurance within their state. I

     

     

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Nice that you drop any discussion on the passage process, yes there is untold resentment driving the issue. Remember is was Obama to told the GOP and McCain to lump it that he won.

    [/QUOTE]

    Was it passed in violation of the law? No.

    It was passed the same way other bills have been passed. What made it necessary? Oh yeah. The part that it was nice YOU dropped:

    Republicans pledged to block everything Obama would do in order to break him before he even took office, proceeded to do just that, and then complained that Obama wouldn't talk to them.

    The direct implication of your position is that, in your view, Obama should not have tried to pass anything because he already knew that Republicans would oppose it.

    They told him so!

    This, despite the fact that he was elected with a very strong mandate and - shocker - reelected over Obamacare objections.

     

     

    Not able to get their way through the Democratic process, the GOP now forces a shutdown of government and blames Obama for not bowing to their obstructionism. Get a grip. If Obamacare is so awful, Republicans will sweep government in 2014 and repeal it easily.

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    If Obamacare is so awful, Republicans will sweep government in 2014 and repeal it easily.



    And before any who disagree respond, I bid them heed their claims that Democrats pass programs to create a base that votes for "free stuff."

    Why do I do so? Because the opponents are running around here waving around every last tale of anti-Obamacare woe they can find re: prices of insurance.

    If insurance is so expensive because of Obamacare and Obamacare requires you to buy insurance, you lose that talking point.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [QUOTE]
    Shutting down an unmanned senic view on a federal highway?

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     



    Maybe if I bold it.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    According to the article:

    The cones were down again Friday as a blizzard hit the Black Hills and plows needed access to the roads, Johnson said. He said the state would be monitoring to see whether the cones are put back along viewing areas.“Once the snow’s off the ground, we’re going to be keeping an eye on how the cones go up,” Johnson said.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Feds trying to close a highway scenic overlook and the Governor has said no you won't.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    They'll be monitoring the cones because they were taken down because snow was on hte way and the plow would have flung them into the woods.

    Interesting article by Krauthammer makes reference to more US Park Service foolishness.

    http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/opinion/krauthammer-who-shut-down-mount-rushmore/article_5aa744a4-963b-520f-ab95-e77c5ec84b2b.html

     click on link for whole stroy, but I found the last few paragraphs the most telling of the absurdity of the Dem indignant holy then thou view.

    ...............................................

    The Democrats insist they welcomed contributing ideas from Republicans. Rubbish. Republicans proposed that insurance be purchasable across state lines. They got nothing. They sought serious tort reform. They got nothing.

    Moreover, the administration was clearly warned. Republican Scott Brown ran in the most inhospitable of states, Massachusetts, on the explicit promise to cast the deciding vote blocking Obamacare. It was January 2010, the height of the debate. He won. Reid ignored this unmistakable message of popular opposition and conjured a parliamentary maneuver — reconciliation — to get around Brown.

    Nothing illegal about that. Nothing illegal about ramming it through without a single opposition vote. Just totally contrary to the modern American tradition — and the constitutional decency — of undertaking major social revolutions with only bipartisan majorities. Having stuffed Obamacare down the throats of the GOP and the country, Democrats are now paying the price.

    It’s the Democrats who have mocked the very notion of settled law. It’s the Democrats who voted down the reopening of substantial parts of the government. It’s the Democrats who gave life to a spontaneous, authentic, small-government opposition — a.k.a. the tea party — with their unilateral imposition of a transformational agenda during the brief interval when they held a monopoly of power.

    That interval is over. The current unrest is the residue of that hubris.

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]



     

     

     

     

     

    Even before ACA insurers were allowed to sell anywhere in the country  ... as long as they met that states legal requirements. Now the party of 'states rights' wants the fed to nullify that state's right to regulate a business within it's own borders.

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No they really want to nullify a Federal law and let it be handled by the states, like Mass.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    No, any insurer can sell in any state they wish as long as they are properly registered within that state. That was the law before ACA and it is still the law after ACA. In fact sates are setting up compacts to allow easier acces for insurers in those states.

     

     

     

    The wingnuts idea is to force states to accept any and all insurers without regard to that states own regulation. That is a direct violation of states rights.

    You've got is bass ackwards.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Their just supporting free choice; is that really a bad thing?

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    At the expense of states rights to regulate their own business environment. Your choice.

     

    If you believe that it's okay to force a state to abdicate their own responsibilities and regulations in the name of "free choice" then you are in violation of the Constitution and your own party's stated agenda.

    Of course for your argument to be true then it would have to ignore that fact that 90% of health insurance customers are from states other than where that company is located. There a very few insurers who don't sell across state lines so how could that be considered a problem with insurance?

    [/QUOTE]

    Sell plans across state line.

     

    man, you are dumber than a box of rocks.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    [QUOTE]

    Of course for your argument to be true then it would have to ignore that fact that 90% of health insurance customers are from states other than where that company is located. There a very few insurers who don't sell across state lines so how could that be considered a problem with insurance?



    Sell plansacross state line.

    man, you are dumber than a box of rocks.

    [/QUOTE]



    Err....s-tard...I mean professor of geology...  

    Are you trying to draw a distinction between "selling insurance" and "selling insurance plans"?

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    If Obamacare is so awful, Republicans will sweep government in 2014 and repeal it easily.

     



    And before any who disagree respond, I bid them heed their claims that Democrats pass programs to create a base that votes for "free stuff."

     

    Why do I do so? Because the opponents are running around here waving around every last tale of anti-Obamacare woe they can find re: prices of insurance.

    If insurance is so expensive because of Obamacare and Obamacare requires you to buy insurance, you lose that talking point.

    [/QUOTE]

    The Democrats have miscalculated the impact of the shut down. people are increasingly putting this on the lap of the Democrats.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from NowWhatDoYouWant. Show NowWhatDoYouWant's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to skeeter20's comment:


    The Democrats have miscalculated the impact of the shut down. people are increasingly putting this on the lap of the Democrats.



    Which is why even GOP politicians are increasingly putting it on the lap of the Republicans.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Now, senic views of Mt. Rushmore are shut down

    In response to NowWhatDoYouWant's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

     

     

     

    Of course for your argument to be true then it would have to ignore that fact that 90% of health insurance customers are from states other than where that company is located. There a very few insurers who don't sell across state lines so how could that be considered a problem with insurance?

     

     



    Sell plansacross state line.

     

     

    man, you are dumber than a box of rocks.

     

     



     

     


    Err....s-tard...I mean professor of geology...  

    Are you trying to draw a distinction between "selling insurance" and "selling insurance plans"?

     

     



    I'm trying to clarify things for the ever-obtuse ACC, who seems to think this has to do with the home office of the insurance company.

    ACC wrote:

    "Of course for your argument to be true then it would have to ignore that fact that 90% of health insurance customers are from states other than where that company is located."

    That makes him a few bricks shy of a full load. 

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share