Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

healthcare.gov

83 views
Skip to first unread message

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 2, 2014, 8:29:08 AM10/2/14
to
Healthcare has now been, "the law of the land," for a year now. The
website still doesn't work correctly. They have scheduled downtime
for, "routine," maintenance. Amazon or weather.com doesn't have to
shut off their sites for maintenance. And no place that I went to on
that site was secure. Face it, government provided health care is a
joke and a failure.


This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

John B.

unread,
Oct 2, 2014, 11:45:13 AM10/2/14
to
On Thursday, October 2, 2014 8:29:08 AM UTC-4, Horva...@net.net wrote:
> Healthcare has now been, "the law of the land," for a year now. The
>
> website still doesn't work correctly. They have scheduled downtime
>
> for, "routine," maintenance. Amazon or weather.com doesn't have to
>
> shut off their sites for maintenance. And no place that I went to on
>
> that site was secure. Face it, government provided health care is a
>
> joke and a failure.
>
I hate to break it to you, but we don't have government-
provided healthcare in this country. Most other developed
countries do and their citizens are uniformly happy
with it.
Message has been deleted

Carbon

unread,
Oct 2, 2014, 10:02:09 PM10/2/14
to
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 18:47:03 -0400, BAR wrote:

> Socialized health care sucks.

You don't know the first damned thing about it.
Message has been deleted

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 2, 2014, 10:54:41 PM10/2/14
to
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 22:24:44 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <pan.2014.10...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>,
>nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
>>
>> On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 18:47:03 -0400, BAR wrote:
>>
>> > Socialized health care sucks.
>>
>> You don't know the first damned thing about it.
>
>I notice that you cut all of my supporting material.
>
>Why did the Swiss just vote to keep private health care?

Who gives a rat's ass? Go away.

Don Kirkman

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 12:42:33 AM10/3/14
to
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 18:47:03 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <ff1b6ab9-820f-4c9c...@googlegroups.com>,
>john...@gmail.com says...
>Ask all of the veterans how they like their government provided health
>care. I grew up in a navy family and I never saw the same doctor more
>than twice in 21 years. Then when I was in the USMC I never saw the same
>doctor more than once. When I had my choice of participating in a PPO or
>an HMO, I took the PPO. I wanted to be able to pick my doctor and then
>go to him every time rather than getting whomever was on duty at the
>HMO.

And I've been in an HMO for several decades and see my same set of
doctors routinely. The difference is not the method of funding but
the nature of the two organizations. BTW, my primary doctor is a Navy
Captain who commands a Navy medical organization when on active duty.
And at times I almost wish I had a health problem so I could go the
clinic more often--she's a very nice person as well as a very good
doctor.
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net

Don Kirkman

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 12:42:33 AM10/3/14
to
On Thu, 2 Oct 2014 22:24:44 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <pan.2014.10...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>,
>nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
>>
>> On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 18:47:03 -0400, BAR wrote:
>>
>> > Socialized health care sucks.
>>
>> You don't know the first damned thing about it.
>
>I notice that you cut all of my supporting material.
>
>Why did the Swiss just vote to keep private health care?

Aren't we still providing private health care rather than socialist?
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 3:29:00 AM10/3/14
to
On 2014-10-02 22:47:03 +0000, BAR said:

> In article <ff1b6ab9-820f-4c9c...@googlegroups.com>,
> john...@gmail.com says...
>>
> Ask all of the veterans how they like their government provided health
> care. I grew up in a navy family and I never saw the same doctor more
> than twice in 21 years. Then when I was in the USMC I never saw the same
> doctor more than once. When I had my choice of participating in a PPO or
> an HMO, I took the PPO. I wanted to be able to pick my doctor and then
> go to him every time rather than getting whomever was on duty at the
> HMO.
>
> Socialized health care sucks. What do you say about the Swiss and their
> recent vote on the matter?

I see my family doctor on a semi-regular basis...

...so who says that having socialized health care makes that impossible?

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 8:44:36 AM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 07:48:56 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <tu3s2adfdq66ni4jt...@4ax.com>,
>bkn...@Conramp.net says...
>Why, does the Swiss voting to retain private health care bother you?

When are you going to wake up and realize that it's YOU that bother
with your insipid, stupid questions?
Message has been deleted

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 11:38:42 AM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 09:07:41 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <jf6t2a1egr04lfc1u...@4ax.com>,
>bkn...@Conramp.net says...
>Why would the Swiss vote to keep private health care rather than
>government health care?
>

We don't live in Switzerland you idiot. Who cares what they do?

Don Kirkman

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 12:52:06 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 07:53:07 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <mp9s2ah3vbanoagbn...@4ax.com>, donsno2
>@charter.net says...
>You sound like the older generation who only has doctors appointments to
>look forward to in life.

I don't think you have a clue about how the "older" generation lives.
As I said, I see my primary doctor every year or so--or less often. I
see my cardiologist, dentist, and eye doctors at twice a year
checkups, not because I'm sick. And age is only a number--I've seen
and done a lot more in my life than you will ever accomplish.

I don't see you posting very much about goings on in your own life or
showing much understanding the issues discussed in this group, so you
may be aging prematurely. I haven't.
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 1:42:17 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 09:52:06 -0700, Don Kirkman <don...@charter.net>
wrote:
You'd seen and done more at half your age than Bert because he's lived
with his head up his ass.

The only doctor I've seen this year is a follow up with the orthopedic
surgeon, who told me that I now have bone-on-bone in my knee, and a
podiatrist for an ingrown toenail. My cardiologist only is a
once-a-year visit to help insure his annual vacation in Aruba. :-).

As some other bone-headed middle aged fools seem to think, Bert feels
impervious to aging. He isn't. If he really had as many parachute
jumps as he claims there are some pains coming that he just can't
imagine.

His main problem is that he's very stupid. His inane ageism will come
back to haunt him if he lives to his sixties or seventies, which isn't
a lock.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 4:03:50 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 09:07:41 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote this
crap:

>
>Why would the Swiss vote to keep private health care rather than
>government health care?
>

Do you want your important health issues handled by the same people
who run the DMV?

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 4:06:13 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 09:52:06 -0700, Don Kirkman <don...@charter.net>
wrote this crap:

>. And age is only a number--I've seen
>and done a lot more in my life than you will ever accomplish.

I don't think so.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 5:48:16 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 17:28:00 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <3ngt2a90uipr7r1ln...@4ax.com>,
>Most, if not all, of you Obamacare acolytes are touting the greatness of
>public, socialized, healthcare and it is interesting that you aren't
>interested in understanding why the Swiss just voted against moving form
>private insurance to state run healthcare.
>
>I would have thought that if your actions were consistent you would
>berate the Swiss for being such idiots in not accepting the benefits of
>state-run healthcare.

Then your pea brain is working as usual. I don't give a crap about
what the Swiss do and neither should you.
>
>http://news.yahoo.com/public-versus-private-swiss-mull-health-system-
>shift-073917245.html;_ylt=A0LEV1BnEy9UJPAAE8FXNyoA;
>_ylu=X3oDMTBybnV2cXQwBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--
>
>If you don't like the US source you can whine about the German source.
>
>http://www.dw.de/swiss-reject-health-fund-reform-at-referendum/a-
>17960712
>
>I would hope that you would drop your arguments that state-run
>healthcare is what the people in the USA want in light of this
>information.

You stupid shit. What does any foreign country have to do with what
the people in the USA want? Damn, you prove your idiocy with each and
every post.
>
>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2014/10/01/60
>_of_voters_want_obamacare_repealed_342413.html

LOL. Real clear right wing bullshit.
>
>Every time you turn around one of your pillars of the socialist platform
>cracks and the platform leans further toward crashing down.

Keep on dreaming.

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 5:50:04 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 17:44:22 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <1jkt2al15e6iur7dc...@4ax.com>, donsno2
>Keep dreaming, it is the only thing you can do with your ass planted in
>a rocking chair on your porch.

He's active. All you do is read right wing propaganda and don't even
try pulling your head out of your ass. You have no idea what you're
talking about....in any aspect of life. In short you're a big time
loser.

Don Kirkman

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 6:30:44 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 17:28:00 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <3ngt2a90uipr7r1ln...@4ax.com>,
>Most, if not all, of you Obamacare acolytes are touting the greatness of
>public, socialized, healthcare and it is interesting that you aren't
>interested in understanding why the Swiss just voted against moving form
>private insurance to state run healthcare.

Why should anybody be "touting the greatness" of things we don't have?
We don't have *public* health care and we don't have "socialized"
healthcare. We have private healthcare provided through hundreds --
thousands? - of publicly owned insurance companies. What we do have
is a government requirement that citizens have health care. And
that's a good thing.
>I would have thought that if your actions were consistent you would
>berate the Swiss for being such idiots in not accepting the benefits of
>state-run healthcare.
>
>http://news.yahoo.com/public-versus-private-swiss-mull-health-system-
>shift-073917245.html;_ylt=A0LEV1BnEy9UJPAAE8FXNyoA;
>_ylu=X3oDMTBybnV2cXQwBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--
>
>If you don't like the US source you can whine about the German source.
>
>http://www.dw.de/swiss-reject-health-fund-reform-at-referendum/a-
>17960712
>
>I would hope that you would drop your arguments that state-run
>healthcare is what the people in the USA want in light of this
>information.
>
>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2014/10/01/60
>_of_voters_want_obamacare_repealed_342413.html
>
>Every time you turn around one of your pillars of the socialist platform
>cracks and the platform leans further toward crashing down.
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net

Don Kirkman

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 6:30:44 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 17:44:22 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <1jkt2al15e6iur7dc...@4ax.com>, donsno2
>Keep dreaming, it is the only thing you can do with your ass planted in
>a rocking chair on your porch.

I have neither a rocking chair nor a porch, which demonstrates how
stereotyped your mentality is. Of course, Hoagy Carmichael made some
money out of his old rocking chair.
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 6:44:47 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 16:48:16 -0500, BobbyK <bkn...@Conramp.net> wrote
this crap:

>
>Then your pea brain is working as usual. I don't give a crap about
>what the Swiss do and neither should you.

Are you nuts? They guard the Pope.

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 6:44:48 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 15:30:44 -0700, Don Kirkman <don...@charter.net>
wrote:

>Why should anybody be "touting the greatness" of things we don't have?
>We don't have *public* health care and we don't have "socialized"
>healthcare. We have private healthcare provided through hundreds --
>thousands? - of publicly owned insurance companies. What we do have
>is a government requirement that citizens have health care. And
>that's a good thing.

I'd love for him to point to socialized medicine in the USA, or his
idea of government healthcare. Spouting ignorance is all he does.

Carbon

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 9:36:00 PM10/3/14
to
On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 22:24:44 -0400, BAR wrote:
> In article <pan.2014.10...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>,
> nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
>> On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 18:47:03 -0400, BAR wrote:
>>
>>> Socialized health care sucks.
>>
>> You don't know the first damned thing about it.
>
> I notice that you cut all of my supporting material.

Supporting material. That's rich.

> Why did the Swiss just vote to keep private health care?

I don't know, but if you think the system they voted to keep is great you
must love Obamacare.

"If that vote had gone through, it would have replaced more than 60
insurers with a government-run system, something that a fair number of
liberals and others would like to see here, too. Instead, voters in
Switzerland opted to keep their current system, which has key similarities
to Obamacare. For nearly 20 years, Swiss residents have been required to
purchase coverage from private health plans who compete for their
business; those health plans have to offer a minimum level of benefits and
can't reject people based on pre-existing conditions; and the government
provides subsidies to help low-income people afford coverage. That's
essentially how the ACA's expansion of private coverage is structured."

http://goo.gl/rqDjjM
Message has been deleted

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 9:45:59 PM10/3/14
to
Ooooh.

That one really backfired on ol' Bert, didn't it?

:-)

Message has been deleted

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 10:04:41 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 21:45:24 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <3i8u2a95a1shnn31e...@4ax.com>, donsno2
>It figures you would take everything literally.

You fucking moron. Of course it was taken literally, how else? Your
lame jokes are never funny.

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 3, 2014, 10:06:13 PM10/3/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 21:46:14 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <o79u2adg3hr1rf6g7...@4ax.com>,
>bkn...@Conramp.net says...
>DOD and the VA

I would say that you must be kidding, but I know better and just have
to repeat that you're a fucking moron.

Don Kirkman

unread,
Oct 4, 2014, 12:35:17 AM10/4/14
to
On Fri, 3 Oct 2014 21:45:24 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.too> wrote:

>In article <3i8u2a95a1shnn31e...@4ax.com>, donsno2
>It figures you would take everything literally.

You used it metaphorically. implying I only sit around and rust. The
stereotypical language is yours--you can't think outside of the
cast-iron box in your head. You can only see one side of any issue
because you've deprived yourself of the chance to entertain ideas
different from the ones you get from your limited sources.
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 4, 2014, 9:14:26 AM10/4/14
to
On Fri, 03 Oct 2014 21:35:17 -0700, Don Kirkman <don...@charter.net>
wrote this crap:

>>> stereotyped your mentality is. Of course, Hoagy Carmichael made some
>>> money out of his old rocking chair.
>>
>>It figures you would take everything literally.
>
>You used it metaphorically. implying I only sit around and rust. The
>stereotypical language is yours--you can't think outside of the
>cast-iron box in your head. You can only see one side of any issue
>because you've deprived yourself of the chance to entertain ideas
>different from the ones you get from your limited sources.

Isn't that how all liberals are?

Carbon

unread,
Oct 4, 2014, 6:52:04 PM10/4/14
to
Well, cluelessly repeating propaganda without any real understanding is
gonna lead to things like that.

John B.

unread,
Oct 6, 2014, 10:23:35 AM10/6/14
to
On Thursday, October 2, 2014 6:47:03 PM UTC-4, BAR wrote:
> In article <ff1b6ab9-820f-4c9c...@googlegroups.com>,
>
> john...@gmail.com says...
>
> >
>
> > On Thursday, October 2, 2014 8:29:08 AM UTC-4, Horva...@net.net wrote:
>
> > > Healthcare has now been, "the law of the land," for a year now. The
>
> > >
>
> > > website still doesn't work correctly. They have scheduled downtime
>
> > >
>
> > > for, "routine," maintenance. Amazon or weather.com doesn't have to
>
> > >
>
> > > shut off their sites for maintenance. And no place that I went to on
>
> > >
>
> > > that site was secure. Face it, government provided health care is a
>
> > >
>
> > > joke and a failure.
>
> > >
>
> > I hate to break it to you, but we don't have government-
>
> > provided healthcare in this country. Most other developed
>
> > countries do and their citizens are uniformly happy
>
> > with it.
>
>
>
> Ask all of the veterans how they like their government provided health
>
> care. I grew up in a navy family and I never saw the same doctor more
>
> than twice in 21 years. Then when I was in the USMC I never saw the same
>
> doctor more than once. When I had my choice of participating in a PPO or
>
> an HMO, I took the PPO. I wanted to be able to pick my doctor and then
>
> go to him every time rather than getting whomever was on duty at the
>
> HMO.
>
>
>
> Socialized health care sucks. What do you say about the Swiss and their
>
> recent vote on the matter?

VA health care sucks because Congress refuses to fund it at
a level where it could be effective. House Republicans have
cut funding for VA health care while tens if thousands of
wounded soldiers have been coming home from Iraq and
Afghanistan.

John B.

unread,
Oct 6, 2014, 10:28:47 AM10/6/14
to
Aha! So Bert didn't even read his own cite. What a dunce he is.

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 6, 2014, 11:50:46 AM10/6/14
to
Have any of you here ever known a bigger goofball than Bert? The only
reason I haven't kill filed him is posts of his like this one. Where
can you find comedy any better than this? He steps in crap and
doesn't even know it.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 6, 2014, 5:18:44 PM10/6/14
to
On Mon, 6 Oct 2014 07:23:35 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
<john...@gmail.com> wrote this crap:

>VA health care sucks because Congress refuses to fund it at
>a level where it could be effective. House Republicans have
>cut funding for VA health care while tens if thousands of
>wounded soldiers have been coming home from Iraq and
>Afghanistan.

Blame it on Republicans. What's next, Bush's fault?

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 6, 2014, 5:19:56 PM10/6/14
to
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 10:50:46 -0500, BobbyK <bkn...@Conramp.net> wrote
this crap:

>can you find comedy any better than this? He steps in crap and
>doesn't even know it.

I was thinking the same thing about you.


Carbon

unread,
Oct 6, 2014, 10:06:19 PM10/6/14
to
Bert didn't have a cite as such, only his usual self-absorbed meanderings.

To his credit, he is at least marginally smarter than immoderate for
having chosen to cut and run rather than insisting he was right for days
on end.

Carbon

unread,
Oct 6, 2014, 10:40:45 PM10/6/14
to
On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 17:18:44 -0400, Horvath1758 wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Oct 2014 07:23:35 -0700 (PDT), "John B." <john...@gmail.com>
> wrote this crap:
>
>> VA health care sucks because Congress refuses to fund it at a level
>> where it could be effective. House Republicans have cut funding for VA
>> health care while tens if thousands of wounded soldiers have been
>> coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan.
>
> Blame it on Republicans. What's next, Bush's fault?

For the quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan? Not Bush. The Bush
administration. There's a difference.

BobbyK

unread,
Oct 6, 2014, 10:51:01 PM10/6/14
to
You're talking way above him Carbs. But then everyone does.

John B.

unread,
Oct 7, 2014, 12:13:22 PM10/7/14
to
On Monday, October 6, 2014 5:18:44 PM UTC-4, Horva...@net.net wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Oct 2014 07:23:35 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
>
> <john...@gmail.com> wrote this crap:
>
>
>
> >VA health care sucks because Congress refuses to fund it at
>
> >a level where it could be effective. House Republicans have
>
> >cut funding for VA health care while tens if thousands of
>
> >wounded soldiers have been coming home from Iraq and
>
> >Afghanistan.
>
>
>
> Blame it on Republicans. What's next, Bush's fault?
>
You're goddamn right it's Bush's fault. He started those wars.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 2:07:02 PM10/8/14
to
I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 2:37:33 PM10/8/14
to
On 2014-10-08 18:07:02 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:

> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
> their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
> to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?

Have you got any proof of that?

Let's see it.

John B.

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 2:48:28 PM10/8/14
to
On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 2:07:02 PM UTC-4, Horva...@net.net wrote:
> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>
> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
>
> their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
>
> to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?
>

According to the GAO, which is certainly more credible than whatever
right-wing wacko sites you read, the government has spent $840 million on healthcare.gov.

You're not a taxpayer? Does the IRS know that?

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 3:43:47 PM10/8/14
to
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:37:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:
Good point. I shall check on it..

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 3:47:42 PM10/8/14
to
So in short, you posted a number for which you have no proof.

In shorter: you lied.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 3:47:55 PM10/8/14
to

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 3:49:00 PM10/8/14
to
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:48:28 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
<john...@gmail.com> wrote this crap:
Yup. I haven't worked in six years.

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 3:54:23 PM10/8/14
to
Yeah... ...you should read more than the sensational headline:

"The federal government’s Obamacare enrollment system has cost about
$2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of
contracts related to the project.

Spending for healthcare.gov AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, exceeds cost
estimates provided by the Obama administration, the analysis found."

> This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe
Lying is your leadership.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 3:57:28 PM10/8/14
to
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:47:42 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>On 2014-10-08 19:43:47 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>
>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:37:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>
>>> On 2014-10-08 18:07:02 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>
>>>> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
>>>> their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
>>>> to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?
>>>
>>> Have you got any proof of that?
>>>
>>> Let's see it.
>>
>> Good point. I shall check on it..
>>
>So in short, you posted a number for which you have no proof.
>
>In shorter: you lied.


He He

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/obamacare-website-costs-exceed-2-billion-study-finds.html

I stand by my words, dumbass.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 4:01:17 PM10/8/14
to
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:54:23 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>On 2014-10-08 19:47:55 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>
>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:37:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>
>>> On 2014-10-08 18:07:02 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>
>>>> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
>>>> their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
>>>> to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?
>>>
>>> Have you got any proof of that?
>>>
>>> Let's see it.
>>
>> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/obamacare-website-costs-exceed-2-billion-study-finds.html
>>
>
>Yeah... ...you should read more than the sensational headline:
>
>"The federal government’s Obamacare enrollment system has cost about
>$2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of
>contracts related to the project.

What's yer point?

>Spending for healthcare.gov AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE
>INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, exceeds cost
>estimates provided by the Obama administration, the analysis found."

That's what it says, proving my point that the taxpayers are coughing
up billions to pay for this nonsense.

>> This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe

>Lying is your leadership.

Where's the lies, Trunky?

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 4:12:16 PM10/8/14
to
1. It doesn't matter whether you found something after the fact. You
admitted you didn't have the information when you FIRST posted.

2. You should have read more carefully:

'The federal government’s Obamacare enrollment system has cost about
$2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of
contracts related to the project.

Spending for healthcare.gov AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, exceeds cost
estimates provided by the Obama administration, the analysis found.'
You lose.

>
> This signature is now the ultimate
> power in the universe

Lying is your leadership.

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 4:15:14 PM10/8/14
to
On 2014-10-08 20:01:17 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:

> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:54:23 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
>> On 2014-10-08 19:47:55 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>
>>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:37:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>>> wrote this crap:
>>>
>>>> On 2014-10-08 18:07:02 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>>
>>>>> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>>>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
>>>>> their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
>>>>> to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?
>>>>
>>>> Have you got any proof of that?
>>>>
>>>> Let's see it.
>>>
>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/obamacare-website-costs-exceed-2-billion-study-finds.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yeah... ...you should read more than the sensational headline:
>>
>> "The federal government’s Obamacare enrollment system has cost about
>> $2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of
>> contracts related to the project.
>
> What's yer point?
>
>> Spending for healthcare.gov AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE
>> INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, exceeds cost
>> estimates provided by the Obama administration, the analysis found."
>
> That's what it says, proving my point that the taxpayers are coughing
> up billions to pay for this nonsense.

And now you're lying about your original claim:

'I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
over TWO BILLION DOLLARS'

>
>>> This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe
>
>> Lying is your leadership.
>
> Where's the lies, Trunky?

You lied when you said you "just read", because if you had "just read"
something, you could instantly have told us WHAT you had "just read",
and instead, you said "I shall check on it."

You just lied when you said your original claim as about more than the
cost of the website itself.

You lose... ...again.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 5:07:37 PM10/8/14
to
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 13:15:14 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>>>>> On 2014-10-08 18:07:02 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>>>>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
>>>>>> their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
>>>>>> to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you got any proof of that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's see it.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/obamacare-website-costs-exceed-2-billion-study-finds.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah... ...you should read more than the sensational headline:
>>>
>>> "The federal government�s Obamacare enrollment system has cost about
>>> $2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of
>>> contracts related to the project.
>>
>> What's yer point?
>>
>>> Spending for healthcare.gov AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE
>>> INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, exceeds cost
>>> estimates provided by the Obama administration, the analysis found."
>>
>> That's what it says, proving my point that the taxpayers are coughing
>> up billions to pay for this nonsense.
>
>And now you're lying about your original claim:
>
>'I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>over TWO BILLION DOLLARS'
>
>>
>>> Lying is your leadership.
>>
>> Where's the lies, Trunky?
>
>You lied when you said you "just read", because if you had "just read"

I read what I read and that's all that I said. Yer just being picky.


>something, you could instantly have told us WHAT you had "just read",
>and instead, you said "I shall check on it."
>
>You just lied when you said your original claim as about more than the
>cost of the website itself.
>
>You lose... ...again.
>
>>
>>
>> This signature is now the ultimate
>> power in the universe
>
>Lying is your leadership.

Being a fucking dumbass is yer leadership.

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 5:08:51 PM10/8/14
to
And yet when asked to tell us what you read you said "I shall check".

>
>
>> something, you could instantly have told us WHAT you had "just read",
>> and instead, you said "I shall check on it."
>>
>> You just lied when you said your original claim as about more than the
>> cost of the website itself.
>>
>> You lose... ...again.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This signature is now the ultimate
>>> power in the universe
>>
>> Lying is your leadership.
>
> Being a fucking dumbass is yer leadership.

Aww... ...touch a nerve?

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 5:09:41 PM10/8/14
to
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 13:12:16 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>Lying is your leadership.

I said TWO BILLION and bloomberg says $2.1 billion. Where's the lie,
dumbass?

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 5:17:11 PM10/8/14
to
Temper, temper, Lieutenant Liar...

The lie is that you said it was all spent on the website, when it is
clear that it was spent on far more:

"AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND
OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES"

And none of that changes the fact that you couldn't tell us what you
had "just read"...


>
> This signature is now the ultimate
> power in the universe

Lying is your leadership.

MNMikew

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 5:18:05 PM10/8/14
to

>
> I said TWO BILLION and bloomberg says $2.1 billion. Where's the lie,
> dumbass?
>
> This signature is now the ultimate
> power in the universe
>
1.7 billion.

http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-03-14-00231.asp


Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 5:26:07 PM10/8/14
to
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:08:51 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's what it says, proving my point that the taxpayers are coughing
>>>> up billions to pay for this nonsense.
>>>
>>> And now you're lying about your original claim:
>>>
>>> 'I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS'
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Lying is your leadership.
>>>>
>>>> Where's the lies, Trunky?
>>>
>>> You lied when you said you "just read", because if you had "just read"
>>
>> I read what I read and that's all that I said. Yer just being picky.
>
>And yet when asked to tell us what you read you said "I shall check".

And that's exactly what I did.

>>
>>
>>> something, you could instantly have told us WHAT you had "just read",
>>> and instead, you said "I shall check on it."
>>>
>>> You just lied when you said your original claim as about more than the
>>> cost of the website itself.
>>>
>>> You lose... ...again.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This signature is now the ultimate
>>>> power in the universe
>>>
>>> Lying is your leadership.
>>
>> Being a fucking dumbass is yer leadership.
>
>Aww... ...touch a nerve?

Not even close. I got you by miles.

>>
>Lying is your leadership.

Not even close. I live by leadership. I'm always teaching
leadership.

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 5:25:53 PM10/8/14
to
What a pity you didn't read the next sentence:

'Across the 60 contracts, nearly $800 million has been obligated for
the development of the Federal Marketplace as of February 2014. As of
that date, CMS had paid nearly $500 million for the development of the
Federal Marketplace to the contractors awarded these contracts.'

Or is it that you DID read and didn't like the truth?

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 5:27:23 PM10/8/14
to
On 2014-10-08 21:26:07 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:

> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:08:51 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's what it says, proving my point that the taxpayers are coughing
>>>>> up billions to pay for this nonsense.
>>>>
>>>> And now you're lying about your original claim:
>>>>
>>>> 'I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS'
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Lying is your leadership.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where's the lies, Trunky?
>>>>
>>>> You lied when you said you "just read", because if you had "just read"
>>>
>>> I read what I read and that's all that I said. Yer just being picky.
>>
>> And yet when asked to tell us what you read you said "I shall check".
>
> And that's exactly what I did.

Right.

And that means that when you said "I just read" you were lying.

Because there'd have been no NEED to check if you had "just read".

>
>>>
>>>
>>>> something, you could instantly have told us WHAT you had "just read",
>>>> and instead, you said "I shall check on it."
>>>>
>>>> You just lied when you said your original claim as about more than the
>>>> cost of the website itself.
>>>>
>>>> You lose... ...again.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This signature is now the ultimate
>>>>> power in the universe
>>>>
>>>> Lying is your leadership.
>>>
>>> Being a fucking dumbass is yer leadership.
>>
>> Aww... ...touch a nerve?
>
> Not even close. I got you by miles.

LOL

>
>>>
>> Lying is your leadership.
>
> Not even close. I live by leadership. I'm always teaching
> leadership.

LOL

>
> This signature is now the ultimate
> power in the universe

Says Lieutenant Liar!

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 5:51:39 PM10/8/14
to
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:27:23 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>On 2014-10-08 21:26:07 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>
>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:08:51 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's what it says, proving my point that the taxpayers are coughing
>>>>>> up billions to pay for this nonsense.
>>>>>
>>>>> And now you're lying about your original claim:
>>>>>
>>>>> 'I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>>>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS'
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lying is your leadership.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where's the lies, Trunky?
>>>>>
>>>>> You lied when you said you "just read", because if you had "just read"
>>>>
>>>> I read what I read and that's all that I said. Yer just being picky.
>>>
>>> And yet when asked to tell us what you read you said "I shall check".
>>
>> And that's exactly what I did.
>
>Right.
>
>And that means that when you said "I just read" you were lying.
>
>Because there'd have been no NEED to check if you had "just read".
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> something, you could instantly have told us WHAT you had "just read",
>>>>> and instead, you said "I shall check on it."
>>>>>
>>>>> You just lied when you said your original claim as about more than the
>>>>> cost of the website itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> You lose... ...again.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> Being a fucking dumbass is yer leadership.
>>>
>>> Aww... ...touch a nerve?
>>
>> Not even close. I got you by miles.
>
>LOL
>
>>
>>>>
>>> Lying is your leadership.
>>
>> Not even close. I live by leadership. I'm always teaching
>> leadership.
>
>LOL
>
>>
>Says Lieutenant Liar!

I read the topic. I didn't need to read the details. Do you sniff
your dog's butt to see if he wiped? Does Nancy Perlousy read every
bill to see what's in it?

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 5:52:25 PM10/8/14
to
You claim to have read the topic, but you couldn't provide a source for
where you'd read it and had to "check" that.


>
> This signature is now the ultimate
> power in the universe

Says Lieutenant Liar.

Carbon

unread,
Oct 8, 2014, 8:17:59 PM10/8/14
to
On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:01:17 -0400, Horvath1758 wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:54:23 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>> On 2014-10-08 19:47:55 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:37:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>>> wrote this crap:
>>>> On 2014-10-08 18:07:02 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>>
>>>>> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the
>>>>> taxpayers over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than
>>>>> Amazon spends on their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's
>>>>> just the site. Sucks to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?
>>>>
>>>> Have you got any proof of that?
>>>>
>>>> Let's see it.
>>>
>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/obamacare-website-costs-exceed-2-billion-study-finds.html
>>
>> Yeah... ...you should read more than the sensational headline:
>>
>> "The federal government's Obamacare enrollment system has cost about
>> $2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of
>> contracts related to the project.
>
> What's yer point?
>
>> Spending for healthcare.gov AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE
>> INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, exceeds cost
>> estimates provided by the Obama administration, the analysis found."
>
> That's what it says, proving my point that the taxpayers are coughing up
> billions to pay for this nonsense.

Did you even read this cite? See, what you crazy people normally do is
cite some cult-owned rag like the Washington Times or Fox News so you can
confident there are no pesky facts to trip you up. Like this one:

"Albright added that the Affordable Care Act had saved consumers about $9
billion in health-care costs so far."

So, even accepting your bullshit numbers there seems to be a considerable
net savings going on. You see, because 9 is a bigger number than 2...

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 4:15:17 AM10/9/14
to
On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:52:25 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>>
>> I read the topic. I didn't need to read the details. Do you sniff
>> your dog's butt to see if he wiped? Does Nancy Perlousy read every
>> bill to see what's in it?
>
>You claim to have read the topic, but you couldn't provide a source for
>where you'd read it and had to "check" that.

I read about it on yahoo. Then I provided a source from Bloomberg. I
also heard about it watching Huckabee. I checked my sources, dumbass.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 4:20:40 AM10/9/14
to
On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 00:17:59 GMT, Carbon
<nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote this crap:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's see it.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/obamacare-website-costs-exceed-2-billion-study-finds.html
>>>
>>> Yeah... ...you should read more than the sensational headline:
>>>
>>> "The federal government's Obamacare enrollment system has cost about
>>> $2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of
>>> contracts related to the project.
>>
>> What's yer point?
>>
>>> Spending for healthcare.gov AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE
>>> INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, exceeds cost
>>> estimates provided by the Obama administration, the analysis found."
>>
>> That's what it says, proving my point that the taxpayers are coughing up
>> billions to pay for this nonsense.
>
>Did you even read this cite? See, what you crazy people normally do is
>cite some cult-owned rag like the Washington Times or Fox News so you can
>confident there are no pesky facts to trip you up. Like this one:
>
>"Albright added that the Affordable Care Act had saved consumers about $9
>billion in health-care costs so far."
>
>So, even accepting your bullshit numbers there seems to be a considerable
>net savings going on. You see, because 9 is a bigger number than 2...

"Albright"? Wasn't she nicknamed, "Halfbright"?

And it's not my bullshit numbers. It was reported on Yahoo,
Bloomberg, and Huckabee. And where's that savings coming from
anyways? You got more hope and change in your pocket?

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 4:54:48 AM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 08:15:17 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:

> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:52:25 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
>>>
>>> I read the topic. I didn't need to read the details. Do you sniff
>>> your dog's butt to see if he wiped? Does Nancy Perlousy read every
>>> bill to see what's in it?
>>
>> You claim to have read the topic, but you couldn't provide a source for
>> where you'd read it and had to "check" that.
>
> I read about it on yahoo. Then I provided a source from Bloomberg. I
> also heard about it watching Huckabee. I checked my sources, dumbass.

And yet when asked, you didn't mention Yahoo at all...

>
>
> This signature is now the ultimate
> power in the universe

Lieutenant Liar...

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 5:08:49 AM10/9/14
to
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014 01:54:48 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>On 2014-10-09 08:15:17 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>
>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:52:25 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>
>>>>
>>>> I read the topic. I didn't need to read the details. Do you sniff
>>>> your dog's butt to see if he wiped? Does Nancy Perlousy read every
>>>> bill to see what's in it?
>>>
>>> You claim to have read the topic, but you couldn't provide a source for
>>> where you'd read it and had to "check" that.
>>
>> I read about it on yahoo. Then I provided a source from Bloomberg. I
>> also heard about it watching Huckabee. I checked my sources, dumbass.
>
>And yet when asked, you didn't mention Yahoo at all...

I didn't mention, "Noneofyourbusiness," either. I didn't mention the
lunar eclipse either.

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 5:19:41 AM10/9/14
to
You said instead "I shall check"...

In short, when you made your claim, you didn't know what your source
was, Lieutenant Liar.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 5:41:50 AM10/9/14
to
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014 02:19:41 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote this crap:

>>>>>> I read the topic. I didn't need to read the details. Do you sniff
>>>>>> your dog's butt to see if he wiped? Does Nancy Perlousy read every
>>>>>> bill to see what's in it?
>>>>>
>>>>> You claim to have read the topic, but you couldn't provide a source for
>>>>> where you'd read it and had to "check" that.
>>>>
>>>> I read about it on yahoo. Then I provided a source from Bloomberg. I
>>>> also heard about it watching Huckabee. I checked my sources, dumbass.
>>>
>>> And yet when asked, you didn't mention Yahoo at all...
>>
>> I didn't mention, "Noneofyourbusiness," either. I didn't mention the
>> lunar eclipse either.
>
>You said instead "I shall check"...

And I did, didn't I?

>In short, when you made your claim, you didn't know what your source
>was

I had multiple sources. And I checked it out and got it in black and
white so that dumbasses like you could see the facts.

>, Lieutenant Liar.

I haven't been a Lieutenant in more than 20 years, Canadian reservist.
Try stepping it up a bit to Field Marshall von Horvath. My
girlfriend's dog outranks you.

Nashton

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 6:50:34 AM10/9/14
to
bakr isn't very good at this, never was.

Nashton

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 6:53:17 AM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-08 5:12 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> On 2014-10-08 19:57:28 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>
>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:47:42 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>
>>> On 2014-10-08 19:43:47 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:37:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>>>> wrote this crap:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2014-10-08 18:07:02 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the
>>>>>> taxpayers
>>>>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
>>>>>> their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
>>>>>> to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you got any proof of that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's see it.
>>>>
>>>> Good point. I shall check on it..
>>>>
>>> So in short, you posted a number for which you have no proof.
>>>
>>> In shorter: you lied.
>>
>>
>> He He
>>
>> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/obamacare-website-costs-exceed-2-billion-study-finds.html
>>
>>
>> I stand by my words, dumbass.
>
> 1. It doesn't matter whether you found something after the fact. You
> admitted you didn't have the information when you FIRST posted.

Bwahahahahhahahaha!

>
> 2. You should have read more carefully:
>
> 'The federal government’s Obamacare enrollment system has cost about
> $2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of
> contracts related to the project.

Yep.

>
> Spending for healthcare.gov AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE
> INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, exceeds cost
> estimates provided by the Obama administration, the analysis found.'
> You lose.

LOLOLOL!

>
>>
>> This signature is now the ultimate
>> power in the universe
>
> Lying is your leadership.

Lying is your whole life.
>

Nashton

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 6:57:08 AM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-08 4:47 PM, Horva...@net.net wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:37:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
>> On 2014-10-08 18:07:02 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>
>>> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
>>> their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
>>> to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?
>>
>> Have you got any proof of that?
>>
>> Let's see it.
>
> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/obamacare-website-costs-exceed-2-billion-study-finds.html

Amazing. Government run amok with spending, *again*!

Nashton

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 6:58:09 AM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-08 5:01 PM, Horva...@net.net wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:54:23 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>

>
>>> This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe
>
>> Lying is your leadership.
>
> Where's the lies, Trunky?

Trunky? Bwahahahahahahahahaha?

Nashton

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 7:01:19 AM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-08 5:15 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> On 2014-10-08 20:01:17 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>
>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:54:23 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>
>>> On 2014-10-08 19:47:55 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:37:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>>>> wrote this crap:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2014-10-08 18:07:02 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the
>>>>>> taxpayers
>>>>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
>>>>>> their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
>>>>>> to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you got any proof of that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's see it.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/obamacare-website-costs-exceed-2-billion-study-finds.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah... ...you should read more than the sensational headline:
>>>
>>> "The federal government�s Obamacare enrollment system has cost about
>>> $2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of
>>> contracts related to the project.
>>
>> What's yer point?
>>
>>> Spending for healthcare.gov AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE
>>> INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, exceeds cost
>>> estimates provided by the Obama administration, the analysis found."
>>
>> That's what it says, proving my point that the taxpayers are coughing
>> up billions to pay for this nonsense.
>
> And now you're lying about your original claim:

Nope. Seriously, you need an education.
>
> 'I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS'
>
>>
>>>> This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe
>>
>>> Lying is your leadership.
>>
>> Where's the lies, Trunky?
>
> You lied when you said you "just read", because if you had "just read"
> something, you could instantly have told us WHAT you had "just read",
> and instead, you said "I shall check on it."

He could have just read it and went on to another page.

Your stupidity exceeds all..expectations. Ouch!

>
> You just lied when you said your original claim as about more than the
> cost of the website itself.
>
> You lose... ...again.

Nope. These are associated costs with the development of the website.
So, considering all the costs, as per Bloomberg, he was spot on.

>
>>
>>
>> This signature is now the ultimate
>> power in the universe
>
> Lying is your leadership.

Nashton

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 7:03:07 AM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 6:41 AM, Horva...@net.net wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Oct 2014 02:19:41 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
>>>>>>> I read the topic. I didn't need to read the details. Do you sniff
>>>>>>> your dog's butt to see if he wiped? Does Nancy Perlousy read every
>>>>>>> bill to see what's in it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You claim to have read the topic, but you couldn't provide a source for
>>>>>> where you'd read it and had to "check" that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I read about it on yahoo. Then I provided a source from Bloomberg. I
>>>>> also heard about it watching Huckabee. I checked my sources, dumbass.
>>>>
>>>> And yet when asked, you didn't mention Yahoo at all...
>>>
>>> I didn't mention, "Noneofyourbusiness," either. I didn't mention the
>>> lunar eclipse either.
>>
>> You said instead "I shall check"...
>
> And I did, didn't I?
>
>> In short, when you made your claim, you didn't know what your source
>> was
>
> I had multiple sources. And I checked it out and got it in black and
> white so that dumbasses like you could see the facts.
>
>> , Lieutenant Liar.
>
> I haven't been a Lieutenant in more than 20 years, Canadian reservist.

bakr a reservist? Don't think so.
Trunky waces cars.

> Try stepping it up a bit to Field Marshall von Horvath. My
> girlfriend's dog outranks you.

My dog outsmarts him.

Nashton

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 7:08:30 AM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 5:54 AM, Alan Baker wrote:
> On 2014-10-09 08:15:17 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>
>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:52:25 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>
>>>>
>>>> I read the topic. I didn't need to read the details. Do you sniff
>>>> your dog's butt to see if he wiped? Does Nancy Perlousy read every
>>>> bill to see what's in it?
>>>
>>> You claim to have read the topic, but you couldn't provide a source for
>>> where you'd read it and had to "check" that.
>>
>> I read about it on yahoo. Then I provided a source from Bloomberg. I
>> also heard about it watching Huckabee. I checked my sources, dumbass.
>
> And yet when asked, you didn't mention Yahoo at all...

"As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool repeats his folly."

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 9:38:06 AM10/9/14
to
On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 08:03:07 -0300, Nashton <no...@nono.ca> wrote this
crap:

>>>
>>> You said instead "I shall check"...
>>
>> And I did, didn't I?
>>
>>> In short, when you made your claim, you didn't know what your source
>>> was
>>
>> I had multiple sources. And I checked it out and got it in black and
>> white so that dumbasses like you could see the facts.
>>
>>> , Lieutenant Liar.
>>
>> I haven't been a Lieutenant in more than 20 years, Canadian reservist.
>
>bakr a reservist? Don't think so.

He said he was. I think it was Coast Guard Reserves.

>Trunky waces cars.

Trunky is not Baker. Trunky couldn't drive a car. Trunky rides a
scooter. Trunky stands on a street corner looking for little boys.
His best friend hangs out at truck stops. Even Baker doesn't go that
low.

>> Try stepping it up a bit to Field Marshall von Horvath. My
>> girlfriend's dog outranks you.
>
>My dog outsmarts him.


Ooh! Let's put up money. Baker says he's IT. Let's see your doggie
type on the keyboard.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 9:46:18 AM10/9/14
to
On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 07:58:09 -0300, Nashton <no...@nono.ca> wrote this
crap:

>> Where's the lies, Trunky?
>
>Trunky? Bwahahahahahahahahaha?
>
Trunky is someone he knows on another newsgroup. Trunky is known for
the many lies he tells. All seriousness aside, Trunky claims to be an
ex Navy Seal, and a former bodyguard for Bill Gates. Race Car Baker
doesn't even come close.

MNMikew

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 9:46:48 AM10/9/14
to
Carbon wrote:

>
> Did you even read this cite? See, what you crazy people normally do is
> cite some cult-owned rag like the Washington Times or Fox News so you can
> confident there are no pesky facts to trip you up. Like this one:
>
> "Albright added that the Affordable Care Act had saved consumers about $9
> billion in health-care costs so far."

Aaron Albright, a spokesman for CMS. Pure spin.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 9:59:01 AM10/9/14
to
On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 08:46:48 -0500, MNMikew <MNMi...@aol.com> wrote
this crap:
Sorry. I thought it was Margaret Albright. Known as, "Halfbright."

What is CMS? Cartoon Motion Studios? Comedy Major Station?

John B.

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 10:23:35 AM10/9/14
to
If you're referring to the former secretary of state, her
name is Madeleine, not Margaret.

Horva...@net.net

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 10:32:27 AM10/9/14
to
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014 07:23:35 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
<john...@gmail.com> wrote this crap:

>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> "Albright added that the Affordable Care Act had saved consumers about $9
>>
>> >> billion in health-care costs so far."
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Aaron Albright, a spokesman for CMS. Pure spin.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry. I thought it was Margaret Albright. Known as, "Halfbright."
>>
>>
>>
>> What is CMS? Cartoon Motion Studios? Comedy Major Station?
>>
>If you're referring to the former secretary of state, her
>name is Madeleine, not Margaret.

You are correct. My mistake and my apology.
I just checked.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madeleine_Albright

John B.

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 12:03:32 PM10/9/14
to
You were also mistaken in saying that ACA website
has cost the taxpayers $2 billion. The correct number
is $840 million.

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 12:39:39 PM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 11:03:07 +0000, Nashton said:

> On 2014-10-09 6:41 AM, Horva...@net.net wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 Oct 2014 02:19:41 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>> wrote this crap:
>>
>>>>>>>> I read the topic. I didn't need to read the details. Do you sniff
>>>>>>>> your dog's butt to see if he wiped? Does Nancy Perlousy read every
>>>>>>>> bill to see what's in it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You claim to have read the topic, but you couldn't provide a source for
>>>>>>> where you'd read it and had to "check" that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I read about it on yahoo. Then I provided a source from Bloomberg. I
>>>>>> also heard about it watching Huckabee. I checked my sources, dumbass.
>>>>>
>>>>> And yet when asked, you didn't mention Yahoo at all...
>>>>
>>>> I didn't mention, "Noneofyourbusiness," either. I didn't mention the
>>>> lunar eclipse either.
>>>
>>> You said instead "I shall check"...
>>
>> And I did, didn't I?
>>
>>> In short, when you made your claim, you didn't know what your source
>>> was
>>
>> I had multiple sources. And I checked it out and got it in black and
>> white so that dumbasses like you could see the facts.
>>
>>> , Lieutenant Liar.
>>
>> I haven't been a Lieutenant in more than 20 years, Canadian reservist.
>
> bakr a reservist? Don't think so.
> Trunky waces cars.

I was a reservist with the Queen's York Rangers.

I haven't been in a long while.

>
>> Try stepping it up a bit to Field Marshall von Horvath. My
>> girlfriend's dog outranks you.
>
> My dog outsmarts him.

Bark for me, little doggie!

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 12:40:08 PM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 09:41:50 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:

> On Thu, 9 Oct 2014 02:19:41 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
> wrote this crap:
>
>>>>>>> I read the topic. I didn't need to read the details. Do you sniff
>>>>>>> your dog's butt to see if he wiped? Does Nancy Perlousy read every
>>>>>>> bill to see what's in it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You claim to have read the topic, but you couldn't provide a source for
>>>>>> where you'd read it and had to "check" that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I read about it on yahoo. Then I provided a source from Bloomberg. I
>>>>> also heard about it watching Huckabee. I checked my sources, dumbass.
>>>>
>>>> And yet when asked, you didn't mention Yahoo at all...
>>>
>>> I didn't mention, "Noneofyourbusiness," either. I didn't mention the
>>> lunar eclipse either.
>>
>> You said instead "I shall check"...
>
> And I did, didn't I?
>
>> In short, when you made your claim, you didn't know what your source
>> was
>
> I had multiple sources. And I checked it out and got it in black and
> white so that dumbasses like you could see the facts.
>
>> , Lieutenant Liar.
>
> I haven't been a Lieutenant in more than 20 years, Canadian reservist.

And when did you retire from the army, exactly?

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 12:41:06 PM10/9/14
to
Still smarting because I once misspelled your name, Nicolas?

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 12:41:23 PM10/9/14
to

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 12:42:32 PM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 11:01:19 +0000, Nashton said:

> On 2014-10-08 5:15 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>> On 2014-10-08 20:01:17 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>
>>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:54:23 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>>> wrote this crap:
>>>
>>>> On 2014-10-08 19:47:55 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:37:33 -0700, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
>>>>> wrote this crap:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2014-10-08 18:07:02 +0000, Horva...@net.net said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the
>>>>>>> taxpayers
>>>>>>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS. I'm sure that's more than Amazon spends on
>>>>>>> their site. That's not fer healthcare. That's just the site. Sucks
>>>>>>> to be you taxpayers. Yer pockets empty?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you got any proof of that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's see it.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-24/obamacare-website-costs-exceed-2-billion-study-finds.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah... ...you should read more than the sensational headline:
>>>>
>>>> "The federal government’s Obamacare enrollment system has cost about
>>>> $2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of
>>>> contracts related to the project.
>>>
>>> What's yer point?
>>>
>>>> Spending for healthcare.gov AND RELATED PROGRAMS, INCLUDING AT THE
>>>> INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, exceeds cost
>>>> estimates provided by the Obama administration, the analysis found."
>>>
>>> That's what it says, proving my point that the taxpayers are coughing
>>> up billions to pay for this nonsense.
>>
>> And now you're lying about your original claim:
>
> Nope. Seriously, you need an education.
>>
>> 'I just read that the website www.healthcare.gov has cost the taxpayers
>> over TWO BILLION DOLLARS'
>>
>>>
>>>>> This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe
>>>
>>>> Lying is your leadership.
>>>
>>> Where's the lies, Trunky?
>>
>> You lied when you said you "just read", because if you had "just read"
>> something, you could instantly have told us WHAT you had "just read",
>> and instead, you said "I shall check on it."
>
> He could have just read it and went on to another page.

Do read random pieces of paper you find on the street? No?

Then you know where you read things, right? Especially when you have
"just read" them, right?

>
> Your stupidity exceeds all..expectations. Ouch!
>
>>
>> You just lied when you said your original claim as about more than the
>> cost of the website itself.
>>
>> You lose... ...again.
>
> Nope. These are associated costs with the development of the website.
> So, considering all the costs, as per Bloomberg, he was spot on.
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This signature is now the ultimate
>>> power in the universe
>>
>> Lying is your leadership.
>
> Lying is your whole life.

MNMikew

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 1:45:25 PM10/9/14
to
John B. wrote:
>
>>
> You were also mistaken in saying that ACA website
> has cost the taxpayers $2 billion. The correct number
> is $840 million.
>
$840 million. through Feb. 2014. Sure to go up. And seeing how it has
been going, go up a lot. Especially since most of the back-end shit
isn't even set up yet.

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 1:56:04 PM10/9/14
to
So you now admit that your $2.1 (or did only say $2) billion figure was
bullshit?

Nashton

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 2:44:04 PM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 10:46 AM, Horva...@net.net wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 07:58:09 -0300, Nashton <no...@nono.ca> wrote this
> crap:
>
>>> Where's the lies, Trunky?
>>
>> Trunky? Bwahahahahahahahahaha?
>>
> Trunky is someone he knows on another newsgroup. Trunky is known for
> the many lies he tells. All seriousness aside, Trunky claims to be an
> ex Navy Seal, and a former bodyguard for Bill Gates. Race Car Baker
> doesn't even come close.

Well, bakr is shaped like a Sequoia tree trunk, so I thought you were
alluding to that. ;)

Nashton

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 2:47:37 PM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 10:38 AM, Horva...@net.net wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 08:03:07 -0300, Nashton <no...@nono.ca> wrote this
> crap:
>
>>>>
>>>> You said instead "I shall check"...
>>>
>>> And I did, didn't I?
>>>
>>>> In short, when you made your claim, you didn't know what your source
>>>> was
>>>
>>> I had multiple sources. And I checked it out and got it in black and
>>> white so that dumbasses like you could see the facts.
>>>
>>>> , Lieutenant Liar.
>>>
>>> I haven't been a Lieutenant in more than 20 years, Canadian reservist.
>>
>> bakr a reservist? Don't think so.
>
> He said he was. I think it was Coast Guard Reserves.

He says a lot of things, mostly lies.

>
>> Trunky waces cars.
>
> Trunky is not Baker.

And yet, so fitting to use for bakr.

> Trunky couldn't drive a car. Trunky rides a
> scooter. Trunky stands on a street corner looking for little boys.
> His best friend hangs out at truck stops. Even Baker doesn't go that
> low.
>
>>> Try stepping it up a bit to Field Marshall von Horvath. My
>>> girlfriend's dog outranks you.
>>
>> My dog outsmarts him.
>
>
> Ooh! Let's put up money. Baker says he's IT. Let's see your doggie
> type on the keyboard.

bakr IT? Would you trust him to fix your internet connection?

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 4:30:27 PM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 18:44:04 +0000, Nashton said:

> On 2014-10-09 10:46 AM, Horva...@net.net wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 07:58:09 -0300, Nashton <no...@nono.ca> wrote this
>> crap:
>>
>>>> Where's the lies, Trunky?
>>>
>>> Trunky? Bwahahahahahahahahaha?
>>>
>> Trunky is someone he knows on another newsgroup. Trunky is known for
>> the many lies he tells. All seriousness aside, Trunky claims to be an
>> ex Navy Seal, and a former bodyguard for Bill Gates. Race Car Baker
>> doesn't even come close.
>
> Well, bakr is shaped like a Sequoia tree trunk, so I thought you were
> alluding to that. ;)

You still want to stick with that, do you?

Alan Baker

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 4:31:01 PM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 18:47:37 +0000, Nashton said:

> On 2014-10-09 10:38 AM, Horva...@net.net wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 08:03:07 -0300, Nashton <no...@nono.ca> wrote this
>> crap:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You said instead "I shall check"...
>>>>
>>>> And I did, didn't I?
>>>>
>>>>> In short, when you made your claim, you didn't know what your source
>>>>> was
>>>>
>>>> I had multiple sources. And I checked it out and got it in black and
>>>> white so that dumbasses like you could see the facts.
>>>>
>>>>> , Lieutenant Liar.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't been a Lieutenant in more than 20 years, Canadian reservist.
>>>
>>> bakr a reservist? Don't think so.
>>
>> He said he was. I think it was Coast Guard Reserves.
>
> He says a lot of things, mostly lies.

Hilarious coming from you!

>
>>
>>> Trunky waces cars.
>>
>> Trunky is not Baker.
>
> And yet, so fitting to use for bakr.
>
>> Trunky couldn't drive a car. Trunky rides a
>> scooter. Trunky stands on a street corner looking for little boys.
>> His best friend hangs out at truck stops. Even Baker doesn't go that
>> low.
>>
>>>> Try stepping it up a bit to Field Marshall von Horvath. My
>>>> girlfriend's dog outranks you.
>>>
>>> My dog outsmarts him.
>>
>>
>> Ooh! Let's put up money. Baker says he's IT. Let's see your doggie
>> type on the keyboard.
>
> bakr IT? Would you trust him to fix your internet connection?

Nashton

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 4:38:22 PM10/9/14
to
On 2014-10-09 5:31 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> On 2014-10-09 18:47:37 +0000, Nashton said:
>
>> On 2014-10-09 10:38 AM, Horva...@net.net wrote:
>>> On Thu, 09 Oct 2014 08:03:07 -0300, Nashton <no...@nono.ca> wrote this
>>> crap:
>>>

>>
>> He says a lot of things, mostly lies.
>
> Hilarious coming from you!

Woof, woof, little doggie.

>
>>
>>>
>>>> Trunky waces cars.
>>>
>>> Trunky is not Baker.
>>
>> And yet, so fitting to use for bakr.
>>
>>> Trunky couldn't drive a car. Trunky rides a
>>> scooter. Trunky stands on a street corner looking for little boys.
>>> His best friend hangs out at truck stops. Even Baker doesn't go that
>>> low.
>>>
>>>>> Try stepping it up a bit to Field Marshall von Horvath. My
>>>>> girlfriend's dog outranks you.
>>>>
>>>> My dog outsmarts him.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ooh! Let's put up money. Baker says he's IT. Let's see your doggie
>>> type on the keyboard.
>>
>> bakr IT? Would you trust him to fix your internet connection?
>
> Bark for me, little doggie!

LOL
>

MNMikew

unread,
Oct 9, 2014, 4:42:09 PM10/9/14
to
Nashton wrote:

>>
>>
>> Ooh! Let's put up money. Baker says he's IT. Let's see your doggie
>> type on the keyboard.
>
> bakr IT? Would you trust him to fix your internet connection?

Wee man probably couldn't fix a sandwich.

It is loading more messages.
0 new messages