Mid

Migrant Caravan

Recommended Posts

“Barbed wire, when used properly, can be s beautiful sight.”

(actual President Trump quote)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sidecar said:

 LB can explain Manus Island policy for you......

But seriously, 15,000 elite soldiers of the best army in the world against how many refugees?

Is it due to the expected high soldier mortality rate because they will die of boredom waiting for the refugees to attack?

OTCMTSU (only Trump could make this shit up)

If they were there to kill them and break things you might have a point.

The US military is usually one of the first to show up at the scene of large scale disasters.

An aircraft carrier can make and deliver a whole lot of potable water.  The Hospital ships are a bit slower and not forward deployed but a helicopter carrier has a damn fine hospital.

The US military can be real nice to people.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, El Boracho said:

Too funny. This is from The ONION? Right? No?

Is this the "Well Regulated" militia we hear so much about? Like the one that freed Malheur National Wildlife Reserve from the grip of three rangers and some ducks?

Almost funny. But scary too.

No, actually, the militia isn't expected to wear uniforms until called up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

If they were there to kill them and break things you might have a point.

The US military is usually one of the first to show up at the scene of large scale disasters.

An aircraft carrier can make and deliver a whole lot of potable water.  The Hospital ships are a bit slower and not forward deployed but a helicopter carrier has a damn fine hospital.

The US military can be real nice to people.

Sometimes it's because the US military has caused them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Deplorable1 said:

Oprah has barbed wire protecting her house. Can you say Democrat hypocrisy?

Cite?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ishmael said:

Sometimes it's because the US military has caused them.

In those cases we come early to the party.

USAID for disasters in the pacific usually shows up on Big Grey Boats.

In Haiti, the military was executing relief efforts while the CGI was planning on building an industrial park.

Puerto Rico was a different story.  Civilians couldn't get their shit together.

Limited by posse comitatus

Hurricane Maria hit the island on Sept. 20, 2017. The first soldiers arrived in Puerto Rico eight days later and would stay until mid-November. Eventually, 17,000 troops – including active duty, reserves and National Guard – were deployed to both Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Their mission: to conduct search and rescue missions, provide medical care and restore power. Soldiers also delivered food and water to both residents and emergency responders there.

Our first question was why it took the military over a week to get to Puerto Rico. By comparison, U.S. troops were in Haiti two days after its 2010 earthquake.

The answer has to do with an 1878 law called the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits American armed forces from performing domestic law enforcement duties. In other words, the U.S. military does not respond to disasters on home soil unless ordered to do so by an act of Congress or for a “humanitarian assistance mission.”

When, in late September, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., suggested that the military should take over aid distribution in Puerto Rico from the Federal Emergency Management Agency – which was clearly stretched thin by its simultaneous responses to hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria – Lt. Gen. Jeffrey S. Buchanan, commander of the U.S. Army North, rejected the idea. His response invoked the limits imposed by the Posse Comitatus Act.

“This is not a dictatorship,” he said. “The military does not take charge of these kinds of operations in the homeland.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So at a party of friends this weekend I was chatting with a guy who is at least a 1%, and he says about that caravan "I don't understand why the CIA isn't down there giving them dysentery, I mean they are shitting their pants anyway".         huh.  Not often you catch me speechless

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Apparently you can. 

LB, with all due respect - I would think a pusstralian would be THE LAST person on this forum commenting on efforts to block migrants from ever reaching their borders and detaining them indefinitely - given what AUS does to actively block migrants from arriving on your shores and detaining the ones who come close. 

Alex, I'll take "What is Manus" for $800 please.

I don’t give a fuck what you do. I actually agree that border security is vital. Manus and Naru are frigging resorts compared to the shitholes they came from and while we must (and do ) our bit by taking genuine refugees, you can’t let every cunt with a sob story in.

What I am poking fun at is the poor simple toothless dickheads who heed the Orange arseholes words and pack up their tents, grills and dogballs and head off to help.

These morons are the pinup boys for the NRA. Imagine if the start actually shooting at people. What if they kill some one? 

What sort of country are you running there Jeff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ishmael said:
11 hours ago, Saorsa said:

...     ...    ... The US military can be real nice to people.

Sometimes it's because the US military has caused them.

Well, yeah, but still...........

One of the things I say to beginner sailors in the Navy Jr ROTC is that the US Navy has rescued more people than any other agency in the history of the world. We've cheated sometimes, it's true, by sinking their ships and -then- rescuing them, but if you take a look at disaster relief around the world in the past 200 years plus a bit, you'll find the US Navy there a LOT more than most people expect. Typhoon in Vietnam in the 1830s (the USS Constitution was there), famines in India, earthquakes in Japan, etc etc.

It's a tradition I'm proud of.

-DSK (ex-BT1 USN)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
15 hours ago, Sidecar said:

 LB can explain Manus Island policy for you......

But seriously, 15,000 elite soldiers of the best army in the world against how many refugees?

Is it due to the expected high soldier mortality rate because they will die of boredom waiting for the refugees to attack?

OTCMTSU (only Trump could make this shit up)

You must be talking to someone who thinks the 15K troops to the border is a good idea.  Its a nothing more than a political stunt for the midterms.  I think the idea is dumber than two men fucking, personally (NTTWWT).  But its also not going to happen.  THe midterms will pass, the House will flip to the D's most likely and trump will forget this shiny object.  Yawn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

You must be talking to someone who thinks the 15K troops to the border is a good idea.  Its a nothing more than a political stunt for the midterms.  I think the idea is dumber than two men fucking, personally (NTTWWT).  But its also not going to happen.  THe midterms will pass, the House will flip to the D's most likely and trump will forget this shiny object.  Yawn.

 

I often disagree with Gunner Jeff's comments, but have to concur totally with this one!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
On 11/4/2018 at 7:10 AM, AJ Oliver said:

I have done some travel and research in Honduras and elsewhere in Central America, and we've had a Honduran youngster in our US home as an exchange student. 

Like much of Latin America, Honduras has a very irresponsible oligarchy that gets rich by keeping other people poor. 

I heard one oligarch say, "I can get you all the laborers you want for eight limps (two dollars) a day. 

The rich live in walled compounds with armed guards. 

That society is a recipe for permanent, low level revolt - and that is what goes on. 

The US is profoundly stupid for supporting the oligarchs. 

I agree with all above.  But the US is also profoundly stupid if it thinks it can fix the plight of the poor in C. Murika by taking in every "refugee" that walks north.

Maybe its High time for a "Latin Spring".  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
9 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
39 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

You must be talking to someone who thinks the 15K troops to the border is a good idea.  Its a nothing more than a political stunt for the midterms.  I think the idea is dumber than two men fucking, personally (NTTWWT).

so what you are saying is secretly it really turns you on.

No missy boi.... I'm more than happy to leave the Gay Bear sex to you and LB.  Not my thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I agree with all above.  But the US is also profoundly stupid if it thinks it can fix the plight of the poor in C. Murika by taking in every "refugee" that walks north.

Maybe its High time for a "Latin Spring".  

Imagine if that is at all what’s happening! Wow! You go cowboy! Such insight!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

No missy boi.... I'm more than happy to leave the Gay Bear sex to you and LB.  Not my thing.

Not a big step from your tranny fetish to playing with Bears...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Deplorable1 said:

Another case of Democrat hypocrisy. Democrats are supposed to embrace LGBT but they are quick to use that lifestyle as an insult. 

Why assume it's an insult? Because you hate and fear gay people?

I just assumed Raz'r  and the others were trying to help Jeff find happiness at last

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Deplorable1 said:

Democrats thinks it’s okay...   ...    ...

How about hurling incorrect English?

Are you actually a far-leftist, posing as some kind of stereotypical Democrat-hater to try to make righties look bad?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I agree with all above.  But the US is also profoundly stupid if it thinks it can fix the plight of the poor in C. Murika by taking in every "refugee" that walks north.

Maybe its High time for a "Latin Spring".  

If the world had open immigration, we would roughly double the world's output.  That is the road to eliminating all poverty.  We should let the entire caravan in with these constraints:

1.  No criminals or infectious diseases.

2.  No welfare.

3.  A long path to citizenship.

4.  Exemption from the minimum wage.

5.  A job secured by the head of household prior to entry.

If they can do that, welcome to the USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jzk said:

If the world had open immigration, we would roughly double the world's output.  That is the road to eliminating all poverty.  We should let the entire caravan in with these constraints:

1.  No criminals or infectious diseases.

2.  No welfare.

3.  A long path to citizenship.

4.  Exemption from the minimum wage.

5.  A job secured by the head of household prior to entry.

If they can do that, welcome to the USA.

WIth those constraints you won't let in the entire caravan.  Controlling immigration is just the point.  If all you can see is a wall you have no idea what the problem is.  Our current immigration laws do that adequately when they are followed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Deplorable1 said:

Democrats are always the smartest people in the room, just wait a minute and they will let you know. 

"Smarter than you" is not a very high bar to get over.

But you make a great straight man, now say goodnight Gracie

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Deplorable1 said:

Just proved my point. Thank you. 

No, YOU proved MY point.

Thank YOU!

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

"Smarter than you" is not a very high bar to get over.

But you make a great straight man, now say goodnight Gracie

-DSK

Good night Gracie.  :rolleyes: 

cannot leave that line hanging out there

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:

Good night Gracie.  :rolleyes: 

cannot leave that line hanging out there

Hmm, you may be older than I thought.....

That's meant as a compliment BTW

-DSK

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Deplorable1 said:

Democrats like to use random capitalization mid sentence to somehow prove a point. Stunning. 

thAt Is a hyPotheSis wHiCh you aRE Never eveR gOing to Prove!!

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

WIth those constraints you won't let in the entire caravan.  Controlling immigration is just the point.  If all you can see is a wall you have no idea what the problem is.  Our current immigration laws do that adequately when they are followed.

 

Not all of them.  Just the non criminals that want to come here to work to better their lives.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fucking brilliant crowd in Washington

"President Donald Trump's decision to deploy US active duty troops and earlier deployment of National Guard forces to the southern border could cost between $200 million and $300 million, according to an independent analysis and Department of Defense figures on guard deployments.

The Pentagon has yet to determine the cost of the operation, nor has it identified the account where the funding would come from. But the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments estimates that the cost of placing active duty troops on the border could range from $42 million to $110 million.
That would be in addition to an estimated cost of $182 million for the already announced deployment of National Guard troops to the border in May." https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/05/politics/southern-border-deployment-cost/
 
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Fucking brilliant crowd in Washington

"President Donald Trump's decision to deploy US active duty troops and earlier deployment of National Guard forces to the southern border could cost between $200 million and $300 million, according to an independent analysis and Department of Defense figures on guard deployments.

The Pentagon has yet to determine the cost of the operation, nor has it identified the account where the funding would come from. But the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments estimates that the cost of placing active duty troops on the border could range from $42 million to $110 million.
That would be in addition to an estimated cost of $182 million for the already announced deployment of National Guard troops to the border in May." https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/05/politics/southern-border-deployment-cost/
 

Which party claims to be the party of fiscal responsibility?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bus Driver said:

Which party claims to be the party of fiscal responsibility?

That title needs to be shoved up some very prominent butts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Fucking brilliant crowd in Washington

"President Donald Trump's decision to deploy US active duty troops and earlier deployment of National Guard forces to the southern border could cost between $200 million and $300 million, according to an independent analysis and Department of Defense figures on guard deployments.

The Pentagon has yet to determine the cost of the operation, nor has it identified the account where the funding would come from. But the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments estimates that the cost of placing active duty troops on the border could range from $42 million to $110 million.
That would be in addition to an estimated cost of $182 million for the already announced deployment of National Guard troops to the border in May." https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/05/politics/southern-border-deployment-cost/
 
 
 

What if we just let them walk there, like soldiers of yore.  Trump gets his parade for free, and we cut the cost of deployment significantly.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, badlatitude said:

That title needs to be shoved up some very prominent butts.

Well, we certainly know of one fiscally irresponsible "republican" with a friggin' huge butt.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Lark said:

What if we just let them walk there, like soldiers of yore.  Trump gets his parade for free, and we cut the cost of deployment significantly.    

 

Oh, but the value of gaslighting his moron supporters - Priceless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Well, we certainly know of one fiscally irresponsible "republican" with a friggin' huge butt.

LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

Which party claims to be the party of fiscal responsibility?

 

Republicans have made that claim for decades, but the facts tell a very different story.  The last POTUS to leave a budget surplus was slick Willie Clinton.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Billy, isn't that the charge of congress? Soooo would the budget surplus not be Newt Gingrich's doing?

Credit is due both. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Billy, isn't that the charge of congress? Soooo would the budget surplus not be Newt Gingrich's doing?

As I recall the politics of the time, Newt was more responsible for the shutting down of the gov't

The budget is proposed by the President as Chief Executive. Authorizing spending is the job of Congress. When they work together, both get credit.

Republican Congresses have not been noted for "working together" with Democrat Presidents

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

Presidents and OMB essentially make a suggestion or proposed budget, little more than a wish list. Congress makes the sausage. A adopted budget cannot be in balance if it is not congresses doing. Which is the problem.    ...     ...      ...

It's especially a problem when the President controls the Executive Branch which actually spends the money.

Do you recall any of the political events of the mid/late 1990s? I certainly do, and to give Newt Gengrich credit is either appaling or laughable, depending on whether you believe it or are just posturing.

Like Newt. Busy strong-arming his coalition to vote impeachment for a blow job, and spending more money on pointless investigations, while running around on his wife. All show and no go.

2 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

...   ...    ... Now the senate used to oversee the whimsies of the lower house. Senate was to be the adults in the room as representatives of the states. Seventeenth Amendment changed all that as now the senate is also out to appease the voters to get re-elected and have become just as fancy free with our money as the house.

The 17th was passed long before I was born. From what I've read of history, the appointed Senate was pretty much the way it is now, only with a lot less publicity.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
14 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
14 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

No missy boi.... I'm more than happy to leave the Gay Bear sex to you and LB.  Not my thing.

LB15s into fucking drop bears, not gay bears, mate.

Well then.... I guess that leaves you all alone for the gay bear sex.  Mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
9 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Fucking brilliant crowd in Washington

"President Donald Trump's decision to deploy US active duty troops and earlier deployment of National Guard forces to the southern border could cost between $200 million and $300 million, according to an independent analysis and Department of Defense figures on guard deployments.

The Pentagon has yet to determine the cost of the operation, nor has it identified the account where the funding would come from. But the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments estimates that the cost of placing active duty troops on the border could range from $42 million to $110 million.
That would be in addition to an estimated cost of $182 million for the already announced deployment of National Guard troops to the border in May." https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/05/politics/southern-border-deployment-cost/
 
 
 

That's because after tomorrow, its going to fade away to a non story.  Trump has hooked you again.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jzk said:

Not all of them.  Just the non criminals that want to come here to work to better their lives.  

That's pretty much the system we have now.  Screen them and issue a visa of one form or another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Don't know about that part. In our republic and under the system envisioned by the founding fathers, there is supposed to be a series of checks and balances. .....   ...    ...

Now I do not think that the 17th Amendment could ever possible be rescinded. So the trick would be to restore the voice of the state houses upon the federal government to restore our system of checks and balances. ...    ...    ... Thus the senate would be restored to its intended purpose, to represent the interests of the individual states.

 

So, it's all about Stay-utts Rah-ttts?

You're right about the checks and balances. The problem is that NO system is totally foolproof (ask an engineer). It depends upon the responsibility and integrity of the people operating the system. You're a bit naive about how well the system worked in the good ol' days though.

IMHO the problem with this country starts with the voters. Lazy and entitled, more interested in entertainment than in being governed decently. Again IMHO it's because we've been coasting on a huge wave of success for two or three generations now. To get back to the OP, why do so many Americans hate and fear migrants? Partly because of the fear-mongering reich-wing press, but mostly because we don't want to compete for jobs.

How about we junk the whole voting and Congress and all that, and just have the teams what win the World Series and the Superbowl govern the country?

-DSK

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

No, not all about states rights, but in a republic it is about checks and balances. To remove such an integral part of that, representation of the member states serves to make the system out of balance.

WRT the OP, I for one do not fear immigrants nor immigration, my wife is an immigrant. Most of us draw our roots from immigrants. The problem becomes unchecked immigration and a failure of our country to manage that immigration process. Thus the fact that immigration is unchecked, and so many have come to/entered the US with disregard to our immigration laws is problematic.  ...      ...    ...

 

The fact that somewhere around 5% of our population is undocumented..... residing here illegally...... is a problem. The way to fix it is not a bunch of fear-mongering, which is what you've obviously been sucked into. There is no way in hell we can round them up and deport them all, or even a majority of them. Also, immigration is not "unchecked." That's as stupid a lie as the claim that Democrats want to invite criminals and rapists in. Stupid, but at least not as mean-spirited.

Until you look at the problem realistically, there is no rational or workable solution possible. Right now the governing party in this country is using fear-mongering and dysfunctional policy and police-state tactics to maintain/increase their grip on power.

Those are the facts.

I'm glad to hear you say you don't fear immigrants. My family has actually been in this country a long time, but that gives me NO priority or precedence or preferment over a person whose ink is drying on their citizenship.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Saorsa said:

That's pretty much the system we have now.  Screen them and issue a visa of one form or another.

No it isn't.  We let in much fewer than apply for visas.  Much much fewer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jzk said:

No it isn't.  We let in much fewer than apply for visas.  Much much fewer.

That's because their visas are denied according to some criteria.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Saorsa said:

That's because their visas are denied according to some criteria.

 

Yes, and that criteria is much different from that which I suggested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

Not sure why you truncated my post in your quote omitting the germane portion, nor why you think I have been drawn in to any fearmongering. I have simply stated what effects 22 million people running across the border does to the pool of low wage earners from an economics perspective. Supply and demand is what it is and that has nothing to do with fearmongering.

Sorry, I focused on what I thought was important.... germane if you prefer.

You've been drawn into fearmongering because of your emphasis on how terrible immigrants are, such a y-u-uge threat, and how the borders are "uncontrolled," all of which is hogwash.

The fact is, about 5% of our population is undocumented, illegally in the country, and what work they do does not contribute to the economy in terms of SoSec or health care, and this is a direct subsidy to their employers. Our gov't needs to figure out a way to improve the process of making these people citizens, if they are here to work then we WANT them here. Talk of driving them out or imprisoning them etc etc is just more reich-wing hate-spew, first of all it's completely impractical, would be hugely expensive to attempt, and at best would only take a small bite out of the problem while driving the rest further underground. Like we need more divisiveness.

FWIW the economic issue of the low-wage worker marketplace is already sorting itself out. CEOs got a 20% raise the last two years running, workers got a 3% raise the last half of this year. We're all migrant workers as far as large corporations are concerned.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Farewell Faithful Patriot!!! :swoon:

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/07/politics/pentagon-changes-name-of-mission-at-border/index.html

Looks like even the pentagon cringed at this one :D

Someone should tell the pentagon that the Duke died in 1979.

If they hadn’t changed the operational name immediately after the election, you might give them the benefit of the doubt on political overtones. But by doing so, it is a straight out admission that it was politically motivated, and by the way, Democrat Americans, you have been pissed on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Caravan? What caravan?

The election is over. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/6/2018 at 7:07 AM, BillDBastard said:

No, not all about states rights, but in a republic it is about checks and balances. To remove such an integral part of that, representation of the member states serves to make the system out of balance.

WRT the OP, I for one do not fear immigrants nor immigration, my wife is an immigrant. Most of us draw our roots from immigrants. The problem becomes unchecked immigration and a failure of our country to manage that immigration process. Thus the fact that immigration is unchecked, and so many have come to/entered the US with disregard to our immigration laws is problematic. By some estimates that number is as many as 22 million people and even conservative estimates pegs that number north of 11 million. Yes we need immigrants, no arguing that and we as a nation have always benefitted from immigrants coming to our shores. The problem from my perspective is unchecked and illegal immigration serves to undermine the wages of the lower end of our economy. By flooding that group with illegal immigration we undermine the earning potential of the less skilled workers. In effect we undermine the American Dream. I find that sad on all fronts. 

And you think that illegals are flooding into the country, now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sean said:

Caravan? What caravan?

The election is over. 

It's just like the Ebola epidemic, except that it fooled more than one moron around here. 

Whistling past the graveyard!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Deplorable1 said:

What happened to the Democrat paid fake bomber? What happened to lying Christine Blasey Ford?

What happened to your health care?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

What happened to your health care?

-DSK

Nothing, it's just that nobody is forcing you to buy health insurance any more.

Your health, your decision.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Not sure what point you are making. Please expand on your thought for greater clarity.

Thanks.

The dull one doesn't make points, he just asks questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Nothing, it's just that nobody is forcing you to buy health insurance any more.

Your health, your decision.

And people who don't, still get free care instead of being forced to pay what little they can afford.

Meanwhile, has the magic of capitalist economics, and market forces, produced more affordable health care?

Which is the FAIL, ObamaCare or the "repeal" of ObamaCare?

And why, with this problem as one of the foremost issues in the USA now, are Republicans all in a dither over this caravan? Or is that pretense finally dropped?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

says the geriatric in the medicare bracket jerked off by another senior.

Hey, it's health insurance that I prepaid all my working life.

If you don't like the system, don't start another forced government program and shut this one down.

I retired at 58 and happily paid my own health insurance until I was 65.  At that point, I couldn't buy it because nobody would sell it.  All that was available were Medicare Supplements because the government had already monopolized that market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

And people who don't, still get free care instead of being forced to pay what little they can afford.

Meanwhile, has the magic of capitalist economics, and market forces, produced more affordable health care?

Which is the FAIL, ObamaCare or the "repeal" of ObamaCare?

And why, with this problem as one of the foremost issues in the USA now, are Republicans all in a dither over this caravan? Or is that pretense finally dropped?

-DSK

The government market places are still open, in fact, it's open season and you can change your plan if you like.  The millions who got signed up for Medicaid instead of being forced to buy their own health insurance are still covered by Medicaid.  If you decided not to buy health insurance it's your choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BillDBastard said:

It seems to me, and I could be very wrong about this but I don't think so, that the more government tries or tried to fix healthcare the worse it gets/got.

Maybe that isn't just healthcare, come to think of it.

The government is NOT addressing affordable health care.  It's just creating schemes to shift payment one way or another.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

it's a wealth transfer from those currently working to seniors like you. if you'd prepaid it, there'd be a surplus, not a deficit and piles of debt.

SO, you agree that it's a stupid, overbearing program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

The government is NOT addressing affordable health care.  It's just creating schemes to shift payment one way or another.

 

That's true, but it is also addressing the issue indirectly because it is putting a buffer in the middle of the winner-take-all fight between doctors and lawyers.

 

8 minutes ago, Saorsa said:
15 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

...    ...    ... Which is the FAIL, ObamaCare or the "repeal" of ObamaCare?

And why, with this problem as one of the foremost issues in the USA now, are Republicans all in a dither over this caravan? Or is that pretense finally dropped?

 

The government market places are still open, in fact, it's open season and you can change your plan if you like.  The millions who got signed up for Medicaid instead of being forced to buy their own health insurance are still covered by Medicaid.  If you decided not to buy health insurance it's your choice.

Except that if you decid not to buy, you can still get the service.

And Medicaid has been rejected by a bunch of red states. It's gone back and forth in a few, here the news is about that fight in Kentucky and how it's playing out.

-DSK

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

It seems to me, and I could be very wrong about this but I don't think so, that the more government tries or tried to fix healthcare the worse it gets/got.

Maybe that isn't just healthcare, come to think of it.

I thought you were worried about the migrant caravan (see thread title)?

Or have you finally figured it out, too late, that was just a fearmongering distraction?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Hey, it's health insurance that I prepaid all my working life.

...   ...    ...

Wrong

It was always a pay-as-you-go system. You paid into it so others could take your money. Now you're taking others' money.

What goes around, comes around.

Kind of the opposite of basic Republican ideology: suck everyones' dick that's above you, fuck over everyone below you. You hate it but unfortunately for you, it's the truth

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Wrong

It was always a pay-as-you-go system. You paid into it so others could take your money. Now you're taking others' money.

What goes around, comes around.

Kind of the opposite of basic Republican ideology: suck everyones' dick that's above you, fuck over everyone below you. You hate it but unfortunately for you, it's the truth

-DSK

WHAT???

The government lied to me?

Whoda thunk it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

WHAT???

The government lied to me?

Whoda thunk it!

When has the government NOT lied to you?

It certainly has in the past few decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

When has the government NOT lied to you?

It certainly has in the past few decades.

The Bay of Pigs.  But they did lie to other people then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm safe now from small pox and leprosy and tuberculosis?

Does SOL get the credit again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mike G said:

So I'm safe now from small pox and leprosy and tuberculosis?

Does SOL get the credit again?

Whistling past the graveyard!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Hey, it's health insurance that I prepaid all my working life.

If you don't like the system, don't start another forced government program and shut this one down.

I retired at 58 and happily paid my own health insurance until I was 65.  At that point, I couldn't buy it because nobody would sell it.  All that was available were Medicare Supplements because the government had already monopolized that market.

Why lie? You know there was no “pre-pay”. You paid taxes so old folks had benefits. Now, you want a smaller number of young people to pay more, so that you can live off their backs. Just another taker Republican.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Illegal migrants entering through the southern US border will no longer be eligible for asylum under a new rule, the Trump administration has said.

More new rules. The caravan will have to swim to San Diego and apply there while in the water, and wait for a ruling before being allowed to land or return. 

Just kidding.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46147137

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The migrants are already here.  They fucked up Tucker Carlson's front door and spray painted his driveway.

*Note to the Trumpters:  That was a joke.  They are not really here and did not do that to Tucker Carlson's home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

E3EB0417-637F-41EA-AF33-A6DEB887E248.jpeg

Ah, but Trump hasn't. New fun and games from the most compassionate president ever to take office.

Trump is about to sign an asylum ban

The policy to limit asylum to people who cross at official ports of entry — teed up by a regulation published Thursday night — is Trump’s most legally dicey immigration move yet.

https://www.vox.com/2018/11/8/18076510/asylum-trump-border-caravan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bhyde said:

The policy to limit asylum to people who cross at official ports of entry — teed up by a regulation published Thursday night — is Trump’s most legally dicey immigration move yet.

https://www.vox.com/2018/11/8/18076510/asylum-trump-border-caravan

Hmmm...

 

Quote

 

The text of the Immigration and Nationality Act specifies that people may apply for asylum “whether or not” they enter the US at a port of entry. The Trump administration is setting up to render that “or not” basically dead letter — at least as long as the expected proclamation is in effect.

The administration justifies this by saying that the law also gives the attorney general broad power to set restrictions on asylum, and the president broad power to suspend entry (an interpretation encouraged by the Supreme Court’s ruling in the travel ban case in June, which didn’t actually specify any limits on this power).

It’s the typical strategy on immigration under Trump: finding parts of the immigration system where the executive branch is given a lot of discretion, and use that discretion as aggressively as possible.

But this comes darn close to using executive discretion to override a specific thing that Congress wrote into the law.

 

Missed it by THAT much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Trump's run off to Paris, leaving you all at the mercy of the Cara..vanished.

(stole that from Lemon, but the subjects certainly vanished)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Deplorable1 said:

 

Yeah. Tell us about those times when “Obama trashed Fox News”. 

Maybe you should quit mindlessly sharing memes. You really suck at it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

Yeah. Tell us about those times when “Obama trashed Fox News”. 

Maybe you should quit mindlessly sharing memes. You really suck at it. 

He just repeats what he learns at those Rallies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Deplorable1 said:

Democrats always manage to conveniently forget that Obama lashed out at Fox News. 

I'd love to see your cites of when "Obama lashed out at Fox News".

But, you'll just ignore that and post another bullshit meme.

It's what you do.  It's ALL you do.  Sad.  Bigly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Deplorable1 said:

There are some videos of Obama going after Fox News. Personally I don’t really want to listen to that man anymore to satisfy your indoctrinated Democrat ignorance. I’m sure that Google and YouTube scrubbed those videos. 

In other words, you've got nothing.  No surprise.

Keep peddling the lies and spreading the bullshit.

It is apparent that is all you are capable of doing.

Nice little sycophant.  Good boy.  Sit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Deplorable1 said:

 

Oh.  My.  God.  After Fox News attacking him 24/7/365 x 8 and he points out their bias, and you dredge up a video in which Fox News whines about his comments.

Poor little snowflakes.  That would include you.

Now, go find another bullshit meme, based on a demonstrable lie, to share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites