Women's March on Washington

[John B.]

Hundreds of thousands of people came to DC today for the Women's
March, substantially more than showed up for Trump's inauguration.
A lot of the bleacher seats along the inaugural parade route
were empty. It was the most sparsely attended inaugural in
decades. This morning, people were pouring into the city
from all directions. I haven't seen anything like this since
the Vietnam War.

[michae...@gmail.com]

WOW!!!! Sounds exciting!!!

[Dene]

Jan 21John B.

Hundreds of thousands of people came to DC today for the Women's
March, substantially more than showed up for Trump's inauguration.
A lot of the bleacher seats along the inaugural parade route
were empty. It was the most sparsely attended inaugural in
decades. This morning, people were pouring into the city
from all directions. I haven't seen anything like this since
the Vietnam War.

--------------

And what exactly were they protesting?

-Greg

[John B.]

You don't know? They were protesting the fact that a paranoid,
narcissistic, misogynistic and dishonest cretin has been elected
president.

[michae...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 12:12:59 PM UTC-5, Dene wrote:

I think it was more like they were raving.

And poor Madonna keeps thinking about blowing up the White House.

I wonder how many of these shits got on an FBI or CIA list.

[Alan Baker]

"Grab her by the pussy" for one.

[Dene]

They should've voted.

[michae...@gmail.com]

Something you have never done.

BTW: a "meat stick" is not a pussy.

[John B.]

On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 1:38:01 PM UTC-5, Dene wrote:
> They should've voted.

Who says they didn't?

[Moderate]

"John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

During the Vietnam War the protest was against the ' baby killers'.

This protest was for the right to kill babies.
--

[John B.]

Yes, I've been waiting for you to chime in with some
stupid remark. Did you make that up yourself or crib
it from some right-wing blog?

[Moderate]

"John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

If you want people to respect your vagina, don't wear it on your head.
--

[MNMikeW]

#butthurt

[MNMikeW]

John B. wrote:

>>
>> And what exactly were they protesting?
>>
>> -Greg
>
> You don't know? They were protesting the fact that a paranoid,
> narcissistic, misogynistic and dishonest cretin has been elected
> president.
>

Hmm. Didn't see them protesting during the Obama years?

[David Laville]

On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 10:53:12 -0800 (PST), "John B."
<john...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hundreds of thousands of people came to DC today for the Women's
>March, substantially more than showed up for Trump's inauguration.

I'm confused, you leftist keep telling us there's no gender
differences, you even champion gender neutral restrooms.

So why did you'll have a "WOMEN'S" march?

[David Laville]

On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 10:06:49 -0800 (PST), "John B."
<john...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>
>> And what exactly were they protesting?
>>
>> -Greg
>
>You don't know? They were protesting the fact that a paranoid,
>narcissistic, misogynistic and dishonest cretin has been elected
>president.

So why were they dressed like vagina's?

[David Laville]

On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 10:54:04 -0800 (PST), michae...@gmail.com
wrote:

>> > And what exactly were they protesting?
>> >
>> > -Greg
>> >
>>
>> "Grab her by the pussy" for one.
>
>Something you have never done.
>
>BTW: a "meat stick" is not a pussy.

They were so upset by what Trump said that they decided to dress up
like vagina's and scream vulgarities.

[David Laville]

On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 07:58:26 -0600 (CST), Moderate <nos...@nomail.com>
wrote:

I kept hearing them scream and shout about women's rights but I didn't
hear one shout or scream about a woman's right to be born.

[David Laville]

On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 06:08:43 -0800 (PST), "John B."
<john...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>
>> During the Vietnam War the protest was against the ' baby killers'.
>>
>> This protest was for the right to kill babies.
>> --
>
>Yes, I've been waiting for you to chime in with some
>stupid remark. Did you make that up yourself or crib
>it from some right-wing blog?

How's that cocoon you live in? The left was spitting on our soldiers
and calling them baby killers when they were coming home from the
Vietnam War.

[John B.]

I have no idea what you're talking about.

[John B.]

They weren't. They work pink hats.

[John B.]

Some did that. Most didn't. And it was 50 yrs. ago.

[BobbyK]

There is no apostrophe for the plural of a word.

But I digress. Read and learn something.

http://billmoyers.com/story/solidarity-plus-10-other-reasons-women-showed-up-to-march/

[Moderate]

"John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

> On Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 7:31:17 PM UTC-5, David Laville wrote:
>>
>> So why were they dressed like vagina's?
>
> They weren't. They work pink hats.
>

Pussy hats.
--

[Moderate]

"John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

I was called a baby killer.
--

[Alan Baker]

Why? Were you in the military?

[MNMikeW]

Man, you really don't keep up very well.

[MNMikeW]

George Soros didn't want any pro-life women showing up and ruining his
leftist, astroturfed protests.

[John B.]

I keep up very well. My wife and I were there, in fact.

[Dene]

See anybody there that was pro-life?

-Greg

[Dene]

I'm all for the ladies gathering together. My club sanctions it every Thursday morning. ;-)

-Greg

[John B.]

I don't know, I didn't ask anyone. But they would have been
welcome. I did see one Trump supporter who showed up just to
fuck with people. He gave my niece some shit about her hat.

[Alan Baker]

I love this fantasy world you've built...

[MNMikeW]

B-b-b-but.

http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/01/20/billionaire-george-soros-has-ties-to-more-than-50-partners-of-the-womens-march-on-washington/

[Alan Baker]

That doesn't make it his protest or astroturfed, Mikey.

Or are you suggesting he paid everyone who turned out?

[Moderate]

Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:

Pretty much the definition.

>
> Or are you suggesting he paid everyone who turned out?
>

Move those posts!


--

[BobbyK]

On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:58:35 -0800, Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net>
wrote:

And to those in L.A.,Chicago, Detroit, Dallas, London or Berlin?
As far as the link above, of course there were women's groups there
that benefit from ffunds by contributors like Soros. So what? Also
it's obvious because of his attitude towards women in general and
wanting to turn over Roe vs. Wade, most women's groups are against him
and have the right to show that.

[John B.]

So what?

[Alan Baker]

On 2017-01-25 1:41 PM, Moderate wrote:
> Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
>> On 2017-01-25 12:51 PM, MNMikeW wrote:
>>>
>>> B-b-b-but.
>>>
>>> http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/01/20/billionaire-george-soros-has-ties-to-more-than-50-partners-of-the-womens-march-on-washington/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That doesn't make it his protest or astroturfed, Mikey.
>
> Pretty much the definition.

Nope.

>
>>
>> Or are you suggesting he paid everyone who turned out?
>>
>
> Move those posts!

Nope. Astroturfing is paying to make something appear to be grassroots.

Unless you're suggesting that all the millions of women who protested
were paid, how is they came out?

[Dene]

>Or are you suggesting he paid everyone who turned out?

And to those in L.A.,Chicago, Detroit, Dallas, London or Berlin?
As far as the link above, of course there were women's groups there
that benefit from ffunds by contributors like Soros. So what? Also
it's obvious because of his attitude towards women in general and
wanting to turn over Roe vs. Wade, most women's groups are against him
and have the right to show t

--------------

Didn't Soros buy those silly hats? :-)

-Greg

[Moderate]

Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about. An
astroturf organization is a movement funded, created or organized
by a business or organization.

They don't pay every paticipant.
--

[Moderate]

Dene <gds...@aol.com> Wrote in message:

>

>
> Didn't Soros buy those silly hats? :-)
>
> -Greg
>

Baker thinks the identical hats were knitted by the participants.
--

[Alan Baker]

Oh, no! Someone came up with an idea and people liked it!

[Moderate]

Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:

And they each knit a hat. Idiot.
--

[David Laville]

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 17:08:38 -0800 (PST), "John B."

<john...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 7:28:00 PM UTC-5, David Laville wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 10:53:12 -0800 (PST), "John B."
>> <john...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Hundreds of thousands of people came to DC today for the Women's
>> >March, substantially more than showed up for Trump's inauguration.
>>
>> I'm confused, you leftist keep telling us there's no gender
>> differences, you even champion gender neutral restrooms.
>>
>> So why did you'll have a "WOMEN'S" march?
>
>I have no idea what you're talking about.

If you have no idea what I'm talking about than why did you post;

"Hundreds of thousands of people came to DC today for the Women's
March, substantially more than showed up for Trump's inauguration."

Alzheimer's?

[David Laville]

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 17:09:13 -0800 (PST), "John B."

<john...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 7:31:17 PM UTC-5, David Laville wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 10:06:49 -0800 (PST), "John B."
>> <john...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>
>> >> And what exactly were they protesting?
>> >>
>> >> -Greg
>> >
>> >You don't know? They were protesting the fact that a paranoid,
>> >narcissistic, misogynistic and dishonest cretin has been elected
>> >president.
>>
>> So why were they dressed like vagina's?
>
>They weren't. They work pink hats.

Still living in that cocoon?

http://awdude.com/2017/01/lets-discuss-worlds-problems-dressed-vagina/

[David Laville]

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 17:10:34 -0800 (PST), "John B."

<john...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 7:32:02 PM UTC-5, David Laville wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 06:08:43 -0800 (PST), "John B."
>> <john...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>
>> >> During the Vietnam War the protest was against the ' baby killers'.
>> >>
>> >> This protest was for the right to kill babies.
>> >> --
>> >
>> >Yes, I've been waiting for you to chime in with some
>> >stupid remark. Did you make that up yourself or crib
>> >it from some right-wing blog?
>>
>> How's that cocoon you live in? The left was spitting on our soldiers
>> and calling them baby killers when they were coming home from the
>> Vietnam War.
>
>Some did that. Most didn't. And it was 50 yrs. ago.

And it happened 50 years ago changed the fact that it happened how?

[Alan Baker]

There should be no differences in human rights, David...

...but there are differences right now.

Hence, women are protesting.

You think if everything was just peach-keen in their lives they would
bother?

[Moderate]

Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:

Women last week were not protesting for human rights they were
protesting for feminism.
--

[Alan Baker]

And those must be mutually exclusive, doofus.

There are some feminists whose views seem too extreme to me, but that
doesn't mean there are lots of feminists who are just trying to get what
they should have without any need to fight for it.

[Moderate]

Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
> On 2017-01-27 11:43 AM, Moderate wrote:

>>
>> Women last week were not protesting for human rights they were
>> protesting for feminism.
>>
>
> And those must be mutually exclusive, doofus.

Some people certainly think so.

>
> There are some feminists whose views seem too extreme to me, but that
> doesn't mean there are lots of feminists who are just trying to get what
> they should have without any need to fight for it.
>

Huh?
--

[John B.]

How do you know? Did you come here and interview them? BTW, women's
rights ARE human rights.

[Moderate]

"John B." <john...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

They had vaginas on their heads.

I heard them speak.
--

[David Laville]

For the sake of argument, I'll say they were protesting for women's
rights.

What rights did Trump take away from them his first 24 hours?

[Alan Baker]

And are you implying that if they were taken away after that point it
doesn't matter?

[Moderate]

Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:

What a moron. The protest took place the day after Trump became
President.

You have not lost your right to be stupid.
--

[David Laville]

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 18:25:04 -0600 (CST), Moderate <nos...@nomail.com>
wrote:

>Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
>> On 2017-01-30 2:49 PM, David Laville wrote:
>>>
>>> What rights did Trump take away from them his first 24 hours?
>>>
>>
>> And are you implying that if they were taken away after that point it
>> doesn't matter?
>>
>
>What a moron. The protest took place the day after Trump became
> President.

That's what made it so pathetic. Yet the gullible left is eating it
up. If their rights were taken away and it didn't happen between
12:00 noon Friday and 8:00 am Saturday than it had to happen prior,
right?

So, why didn't we see this march during Obama's term?

[Dene]

Anything for attention.

-Greg

[Moderate]

David Laville <dlav...@bellsouth.net> Wrote in message:

Liberalism is a mental disorder.

They perceive a problem where none exists.
--

[bobby...@onramp.net]

Because it has been festering for years with feminists, plus the fact
that the GOP is getting closer to trying to do away with Roe vs Wade.

[Dene]

hide quoted text -

Hallelujah!
The end of genocide due to convenience.

-Greg

[John B.]

They were protesting the election of a president who has bragged
about sexually assaulting women, who wants to take away their
right to an abortion, who has appointed only two women to his cabinet,
who says he'd be fucking his daughter if he weren't her father,
who has been accused by several women of groping them against
their will, etc, etc.

[John B.]

Because Obama had respect for women and considered them
equal to men. Trump doesn't respect them by his own
admission.

[bobby...@onramp.net]

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 19:04:28 -0800 (PST), Dene <gds...@aol.com>
wrote:

You have no idea what you're talking about. Roe vs. Wade has nothing
to do with genocide. There are stringent limits to abortions that see
to that.

[MNMikeW]

bobby...@Onramp.net wrote:

>> Because it has been festering for years with feminists, plus the fact
>> that the GOP is getting closer to trying to do away with Roe vs Wade.
>>
>> Hallelujah!
>> The end of genocide due to convenience.
>>
> You have no idea what you're talking about. Roe vs. Wade has nothing
> to do with genocide. There are stringent limits to abortions that see
> to that.
>

Like what?

[bobby...@onramp.net]

For starters, only in the first trimester. Must be approved by a
licensed doctor. Must be done in a clinic or hospital. Not used for
birth control. Allowed for intervention of mother's or embryo's
probable demise, and in the case of major deformities in embryo.

[Alan Baker]

They can protest against what they see coming, David.

[Alan Baker]

Why is it you care so much about saving some lives (fetuses)...

...but have no calms at all about what a refugee ban will do to children?

[Moderate]

Alan Baker <alang...@telus.net> Wrote in message:
>>
>

> Why is it you care so much about saving some lives (fetuses)...
>
> ...but have no calms at all about what a refugee ban will do to children?
>

We want to save the lives of children by screening terrorists.
--

[Dene]

Makes no difference. An innocent life is snuffed out due to the inconvenience of the "mother" and the greed of the "providers."

-Greg

[bobby...@onramp.net]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 12:53:54 -0800 (PST), Dene <gds...@aol.com>
wrote:

Greg, you are so fucked up over your new hero that common sense
doesn't matter to you.

No one, even the Pro Choice element approves of abortion except in
emergency services. We have a very good friend who in the second
month found out medically that the embryo in her body had less than
half a brain. It was destined to die a terrible, suffering, death
once born. Maybe a week, maybe years. Do you honestly think that
bringing it into that world, along with the utterly smothering costs
that would have ruined the parent's lives, would be reasonable?
Incidentally, the lady, even though she was a Right to Life
Republican, chose to abort. If Roe vs. Wade is overturned she
wouldn't have this choice. That's just one example.

[MNMikeW]

bobby...@Onramp.net wrote:

>>
>> Makes no difference. An innocent life is snuffed out due to the inconvenience of the "mother" and the greed of the "providers."
>>
>
> Greg, you are so fucked up over your new hero that common sense
> doesn't matter to you.

Yes, anyone who does not tote the BK line is fucked up. Typical lib.

>
> No one, even the Pro Choice element approves of abortion except in
> emergency services.

BS.

We have a very good friend who in the second
> month found out medically that the embryo in her body had less than
> half a brain.

Democrats need to live to! :-)

It was destined to die a terrible, suffering, death
> once born. Maybe a week, maybe years. Do you honestly think that
> bringing it into that world, along with the utterly smothering costs
> that would have ruined the parent's lives, would be reasonable?
> Incidentally, the lady, even though she was a Right to Life
> Republican, chose to abort. If Roe vs. Wade is overturned she
> wouldn't have this choice. That's just one example.

You forget Trump was a Dem at one time. I think RvW is safe.

[Dene]

Really Bobby....the vast amount of abortion are due to "convenience," not mother's health, child's health, nor rape and incest. There are few in the pro-life community who have objections to abortions for the reasons I just listed...or the one you listed.

You know from being on this planet awhile that is true! Abortion for most is a form of birth control.

Trump is not my hero. The verdict is out....but he is getting things done, unlike your do-nothing, pretty boy hero!

-Greg

[Dene]

I think RvW will be repealed and deferred to the states, where it belongs.

-Greg

[bobby...@onramp.net]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 16:01:15 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:

>bobby...@Onramp.net wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Makes no difference. An innocent life is snuffed out due to the inconvenience of the "mother" and the greed of the "providers."
>>>
>>
>> Greg, you are so fucked up over your new hero that common sense
>> doesn't matter to you.
>
>Yes, anyone who does not tote the BK line is fucked up. Typical lib.

Typical small mind. This is not my line and Greg is all over the
place with his posts, noted by having to constantly remind him that
his questions have been answered.....several times. Now, read what I
wrote here. You might even learn something.

>>
>> No one, even the Pro Choice element approves of abortion except in
>> emergency services.
>BS.
>
> We have a very good friend who in the second
>> month found out medically that the embryo in her body had less than
>> half a brain.
>
>Democrats need to live to! :-)

Obviously you didn't read what I wrote. She's a Pro Choice
Republican.

>
> It was destined to die a terrible, suffering, death
>> once born. Maybe a week, maybe years. Do you honestly think that
>> bringing it into that world, along with the utterly smothering costs
>> that would have ruined the parent's lives, would be reasonable?
>> Incidentally, the lady, even though she was a Right to Life
>> Republican, chose to abort. If Roe vs. Wade is overturned she
>> wouldn't have this choice. That's just one example.
>
>You forget Trump was a Dem at one time. I think RvW is safe.

That and Planned Parenthood isn't his call. GOP will do it, if they
can. Depends on the Supreme Court.

[bobby...@onramp.net]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 14:03:33 -0800 (PST), Dene <gds...@aol.com>

I object to birth control too, who doesn't. But doing away with Roe
vs. Wade will only curtail legal and needed abortions.

>
>You know from being on this planet awhile that is true! Abortion for most is a form of birth control.
>
>Trump is not my hero.

You have defended every lie he's told and have yet to criticize what
a mess he's put the government in, or the ridiculous appointments.

The verdict is out....but he is getting things done, unlike your
do-nothing, pretty boy hero!

The verdict is in with anyone who sees what's happening, and he hasn't
gotten anything done yet.

Obama is looking better and better each day.
>
>-Greg

[MNMikeW]

bobby...@Onramp.net wrote:

>>> Greg, you are so fucked up over your new hero that common sense
>>> doesn't matter to you.
>>
>> Yes, anyone who does not tote the BK line is fucked up. Typical lib.
>
> Typical small mind. This is not my line and Greg is all over the
> place with his posts, noted by having to constantly remind him that
> his questions have been answered.....several times. Now, read what I
> wrote here. You might even learn something.

LOL! Perfect!

>
>>>
>>> No one, even the Pro Choice element approves of abortion except in
>>> emergency services.
>> BS.
>>
>> We have a very good friend who in the second
>>> month found out medically that the embryo in her body had less than
>>> half a brain.
>>
>> Democrats need to live to! :-)
>
> Obviously you didn't read what I wrote. She's a Pro Choice
> Republican.

Um, um say, it's a joke son, it's a joke.

>>
>> It was destined to die a terrible, suffering, death
>>> once born. Maybe a week, maybe years. Do you honestly think that
>>> bringing it into that world, along with the utterly smothering costs
>>> that would have ruined the parent's lives, would be reasonable?
>>> Incidentally, the lady, even though she was a Right to Life
>>> Republican, chose to abort. If Roe vs. Wade is overturned she
>>> wouldn't have this choice. That's just one example.
>>
>> You forget Trump was a Dem at one time. I think RvW is safe.
>
> That and Planned Parenthood isn't his call. GOP will do it, if they
> can. Depends on the Supreme Court.

PP will be defunded.

[MNMikeW]

bobby...@Onramp.net wrote:

> You have defended every lie he's told and have yet to criticize what
> a mess he's put the government in, or the ridiculous appointments.

Perhaps he does not see it the way you do. YOU think its a mess. YOU
think the appointments are ridiculous.

>
> The verdict is out....but he is getting things done, unlike your
> do-nothing, pretty boy hero!
>
> The verdict is in with anyone who sees what's happening, and he hasn't
> gotten anything done yet.

Bullshit. The leftists like yourself would be silent if he didn't do
anything.
>

[bobby...@onramp.net]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 17:15:11 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:

>bobby...@Onramp.net wrote:
>
>>>> Greg, you are so fucked up over your new hero that common sense
>>>> doesn't matter to you.
>>>
>>> Yes, anyone who does not tote the BK line is fucked up. Typical lib.
>>
>> Typical small mind. This is not my line and Greg is all over the
>> place with his posts, noted by having to constantly remind him that
>> his questions have been answered.....several times. Now, read what I
>> wrote here. You might even learn something.
>
>LOL! Perfect!
>>
>>>>
>>>> No one, even the Pro Choice element approves of abortion except in
>>>> emergency services.
>>> BS.
>>>
>>> We have a very good friend who in the second
>>>> month found out medically that the embryo in her body had less than
>>>> half a brain.
>>>
>>> Democrats need to live to! :-)
>>
>> Obviously you didn't read what I wrote. She's a Pro Choice
>> Republican.
>
>Um, um say, it's a joke son, it's a joke.

Double entendres aren't laughable sometimes.

[bobby...@onramp.net]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 17:18:22 -0600, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:

>bobby...@Onramp.net wrote:
>
>> You have defended every lie he's told and have yet to criticize what
>> a mess he's put the government in, or the ridiculous appointments.
>
>Perhaps he does not see it the way you do. YOU think its a mess. YOU
>think the appointments are ridiculous.

Yep. Greg's opinions have given me license to post rebuttals.

>>
>> The verdict is out....but he is getting things done, unlike your
>> do-nothing, pretty boy hero!
>>
>> The verdict is in with anyone who sees what's happening, and he hasn't
>> gotten anything done yet.
>
>Bullshit. The leftists like yourself would be silent if he didn't do
>anything.

I'm sure there may be one, but name an act fulfilled, as yet.
You know, an accomplishment.

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 5:03:35 PM UTC-5, Dene wrote:
>...

> Trump is not my hero. The verdict is out....but he is getting things
> done, unlike your do-nothing, pretty boy hero!

By "do-nothing, pretty boy hero", are you by any chance referring to
that guy who got the ACA passed?

You remember the ACA, don't you? It was the catalyst which was
was actually finally having some success in reining in the rate of
cost growth in healthcare premiums. Perhaps you should go talk
to someone reasonably well informed in that industry for more info.


-hh

[Moderate]

recscub...@huntzinger.com Wrote in message:

Scooby is delusional. When Obama said he would save every family
$2,500 he believed it.

Bought into the Arab Spring, ISIS is JV, the reset button, red
line, and ignores the debt.

Let's protest!
--

[Moderate]

"Alan Baker" <LastWor...@tTwats.net> Wrote in message:

> Astounding ignorance and disingenuity; you are scared of your own
> shadow and pray this measure will help make you safer. It won't.
>
> You are far more likely to get accidentally shot by a child than harmed
> by a terrorist, homegrown or otherwise.

I am? What are you afraid of? Americans using common sense?
>
=



--

[Dene]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 14:03:33 -0800 (PST), Dene <gds...@aol.com>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 1:53:36 PM UTC-8, bobby...@onramp.net wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 12:53:54 -0800 (PST), Dene <gds...@aol.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 10:31:02 AM UTC-8, bobby...@onramp.net wrote:

- show quoted text -

I object to birth control too, who doesn't. But doing away with Roe
vs. Wade will only curtail legal and needed abortions.
>
>You know from being on this planet awhile that is true! Abortion for most is a form of birth control.
>
>Trump is not my hero.
You have defended every lie he's told and have yet to criticize what
a mess he's put the government in, or the ridiculous appointments.

You have criticized every move he has made.

The verdict is out....but he is getting things done, unlike your
do-nothing, pretty boy hero!

The verdict is in with anyone who sees what's happening, and he hasn't
gotten anything done yet.

Obama is looking better and better each day.
>

Allow me to change the subject please. Saw LaLaLand. Seen it? Definitely a strong Jazz theme. Your thoughts. I enjoyed it.

-Greg

[Alan Baker]

You are good at running away...

[Alan Baker]

On 2017-01-31 10:24 PM, Alan Baker wrote:

> Again, more likely to get shot by a child!

Don't use my name.

[bobby...@onramp.net]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 20:48:00 -0800 (PST), Dene <gds...@aol.com>
wrote:


>

>Allow me to change the subject please. Saw LaLaLand. Seen it? Definitely a strong Jazz theme. Your thoughts. I enjoyed it.
>
>-Greg

No, haven't seen it but looking forward to.

[MNMikeW]

Leaves you out, snorkel breath.

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

On Monday, February 6, 2017 at 9:53:26 AM UTC-5, MNMikeW wrote:

True, it isn't my industry, but it is Greg's. Even though it
wasn't your intent, thanks for reminding Greg that he's dodged
answering this one.


-hh

[Dene]

On Monday, February 6, 2017 at 9:53:26 AM UTC-5, MNMikeW wrote:
> -hh wrote:

- hide quoted text -

---------

No Dodge, Ford, or Chrysler....snorkel breath. :-) I simply didn't notice or read your post.

Yes… Obama got ACA done but to say that it reigned in health insurance premiums is a lie on a Baker scale. I for one am paying a hell of a lot more than I used to…for a lot less coverage.

Beyond ACA, Obama did very little. The mark of a good president is the ability to work with the other party. He played golf and gave pretty speeches.

America noticed…and took a chance with the wildcard.

-Greg

[Alan Baker]

LOL!

And yet you assign no blame at all to the Republicans who set out to
oppose Obama automatically on every issue.

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

On Monday, February 6, 2017 at 11:31:53 PM UTC-5, Dene wrote:

> -hh wrote:
>> MNMikeW wrote:
>> > -hh wrote:
>> - hide quoted text -
>> > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 5:03:35 PM UTC-5, Dene wrote:
>> > >> ...
>> > >> Trump is not my hero. The verdict is out....but he is getting things
>> > >> done, unlike your do-nothing, pretty boy hero!
>> > >
>> > > By "do-nothing, pretty boy hero", are you by any chance referring to
>> > > that guy who got the ACA passed?
>> > >
>> > > You remember the ACA, don't you? It was the catalyst which was
>> > > was actually finally having some success in reining in the rate of
>> > > cost growth in healthcare premiums. Perhaps you should go talk
>> > > to someone reasonably well informed in that industry for more info.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > -hh
>> >
>> > Leaves you out, snorkel breath.
>>
>> True, it isn't my industry, but it is Greg's. Even though it
>> wasn't your intent, thanks for reminding Greg that he's dodged
>> answering this one.
>
>

> No Dodge, Ford, or Chrysler....snorkel breath. :-) I simply
> didn't notice or read your post.

Avoidance is still a dodge.


> Yes… Obama got ACA done but ...

"but" nothing: the claim that he was a do-nothing is debunked.

> ... to say that it reigned in health insurance premiums

> is a lie on a Baker scale.

Because you said so? Or because you can substantiate your
claim? Cite please.

Case in point, this source says that they went down:

<http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2016/07/21/obamacare-premiums-are-lower-than-you-think/>


This next source stated that while costs did go up by 50% over
eight years, but the Kaiser study found that the rate of increase
was roughly half (+20% for 2011-16 vs +31% 2006-11 & +63% 2001-06),
which was the basis for the statement of: "The average premium
for a family with employer coverage is now almost $3,600 lower than
if premium growth since 2010 had matched the decade preceding the
Affordable Care Act."

<http://time.com/money/4503325/obama-health-care-costs-obamacare/>


And once again:

"Surprisingly good news about premiums

Three years before the ACA took effect, health insurance premiums
were increasing by 10 percent to 12 percent each year, and the
rate of the uninsured was growing.

Today, even as news about big premium increases for 2017 raises
concerns about the Affordable Care Act’s long-term health, an
analysis released last week in the journal Health Affairs seeks
to put things in perspective. The upshot: Things could be worse.

It turns out that the average premiums in the individual market
actually dropped when the ACA was implemented.

'Average premiums for the second-lowest cost silver-level (SLS)
marketplace plan in 2014, which serves as a benchmark for ACA
subsidies, were between 10 and 21 percent lower than average
individual market premiums in 2013, before the ACA…,' write
researchers from the Brookings Institute."

<https://www.healthinsurance.org/blog/2016/07/29/health-premiums-after-obamacare-theyre-lower/>

> I for one am paying a hell of a lot more than I used to…for
> a lot less coverage.

You're trying to use a personal anecdote to dispute conclusions
from aggregated statistical population analysis? Really?

And are you really getting "less"? Because one of the
bitches about the ACA is that it established some minimum
standards for the issuers ("Essential" benefits), which
resulted in a lot of plans being cancelled as non-compliant
(FYI, which was where a lot of the "you can keep your doctor"
stuff actually originated from).

So do note that the magnitude of deductibles is NOT the
definition of coverage. For example, if you didn't have
any coverage for mental health before, now you do:

<http://www.forbes.com/sites/investopedia/2013/10/11/essential-health-benefits-under-the-affordable-care-act/#778f0b1c22c6>

> Beyond ACA, Obama did very little.

Well, except for how he also effectively kept his primary campaign promise.

Oh, plus Osama Bin Laden was finally neutralized, which
was a long tough recovery from Bush's Tora Bora.

And although there were huge mistakes made, kept US ground
troops out of Syria.

And for Iran's nuclear weapons program, its either been
reigned in, or the can has been kicked down the road to
defer the confrontation for several more years.

And North Korea didn't do anything profoundly stupid.

And the Great Recession didn't become a second Great Depression.

Plus plenty of other stuff, if we bother to look.

> The mark of a good president is the ability to work with
> the other party.

And it always takes two to tango, but the Republican party
was extremely blatant in its very deliberate obstructionism.
The stonewalling on the 2016 Supreme Court nomination being
one of the most recent concrete examples.

> America noticed…and took a chance with the wildcard.

Yes, they did. But those who were most desperate to
reach for salvation are going to be the ones who are
going to get hurt the worst with this group's emerging
policy shifts. The question is going to be how & when
this public realizes what they've gotten themselves into,
and how they're going to react when the realize just all
the different ways they're being fucked over.

Contemporary case in point, Education: the intended
strategy is to skim profits off of the public system
by subsidizing inferior quality private schools through
a voucher system, which will cherrypick its regions and
students, which will result in the "unprofitables" as the
responsibility of the State to pay for.

If you think about it, its not too dissimilar to what's
happened with the US prison system: set up mechanisms
by which the State will fund a private business where
the product demand is not only guaranteed, but can also
be selected so as to maximize private profits.


-hh

[MNMikeW]

Alan Baker wrote:

>>
>> Beyond ACA, Obama did very little. The mark of a good president is the
>> ability to work with the other party. He played golf and gave pretty
>> speeches.
>>
>> America noticed…and took a chance with the wildcard.
>>
>> -Greg
>>
>
> LOL!
>
> And yet you assign no blame at all to the Republicans who set out to
> oppose Obama automatically on every issue.

Will the Democrats get the blame when they set out to oppose Trump
automatically on every issue?

[Dene]

Nope.....nor do they accept responsibility for the six years of nothing during the Obama administration. Republicans had their own agenda and it was blocked first by Harry Reid, and then Obama. Gridlock is a two-way street.

Fortunately the Republicans are in power and things will get done, leaving the Left to whine, spin, and riot.

-Greg

[Bob...@onramp.net]

Blame? They should be canonized.

[MNMikeW]

I see. Typical lefty double standard.

[Dene]

I have neither the time nor the patience to read a post like that. I've been in this health insurance business for 26 years and I know that in the seven states that I represent, premiums have gone up far more than prior to ACA. The ones who have gotten a break or those who are "poor enough" to acquire a tax credit.

Insurance companies had to assume all risk without the benefit of young immortals joining the plans, most opted out for Medicaid or remain uninsured. Consequently, claims have risen through the roof and in turn, premiums. Insurance companies have withdrawn, leaving just one ACA plan in the majority of counties throughout the country. It is broken and it needs to be fixed.

If you have something specific you want to refute, then do so succinctly. I'm not gonna read a damn term paper.

-Greg

[Bob...@onramp.net]

On Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:32:25 -0800 (PST), Dene <gds...@aol.com> wrote:

>Alan Baker wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Beyond ACA, Obama did very little. The mark of a good president is the
>>> ability to work with the other party. He played golf and gave pretty
>>> speeches.
>>>
>>> America noticed…and took a chance with the wildcard.
>>>
>>> -Greg
>>>
>>
>> LOL!
>>
>> And yet you assign no blame at all to the Republicans who set out to
>> oppose Obama automatically on every issue.
>
>Will the Democrats get the blame when they set out to oppose Trump
>automatically on every issue?
>
>Nope.....nor do they accept responsibility for the six years of nothing during
> the Obama administration.

Nothing? Wrong Greg.

>Republicans had their own agenda and it was blocked first by Harry Reid,
>and then Obama. Gridlock is a two-way street.
>
>Fortunately the Republicans are in power and things will get done, leaving the Left to whine, spin, and riot.

You're going to be surprised that Trump's outre policies are going to
be diluted by this Republican Congress. The courts will be a
roadblock also.

[Bob...@onramp.net]

Not at all. There are Conservative Republicans who aren't going to go
along with some of Trump's idiocy.

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 11:26:04 AM UTC-5, Dene wrote:
> I have neither the time nor the patience to read a post like that.

Oh, so then this will be Greg's last post for this week?
Time will tell.

> I've been in this health insurance business for 26 years and
> I know that in the seven states that I represent, premiums
> have gone up far more than prior to ACA.

Unsubstantiated claim. Data please.

> The ones who have gotten a break or those who are "poor
> enough" to acquire a tax credit.

There's that factor too, but I wasn't even trying to count
it as credit.

> Insurance companies had to assume all risk without the
> benefit of young immortals joining the plans, most opted
> out for Medicaid or remain uninsured. Consequently, claims
> have risen through the roof and in turn, premiums.

This behavior was known before ACA was even implemented; the
rates question all along has been at what point would the
"Stick" of tax penalties finally motivate the young immortals
to sign up ... and there were signs of this adoption trending
upwards in 2016.

> Insurance companies have withdrawn, leaving just one ACA plan
> in the majority of counties throughout the country.

Unfortunately, you can't attribute everything to just that
one cause. For example, there was also the Anthem-Cigna
merger which the Feds turned down despite a pretty damn explicit
threat from those companies that if the Regulators didn't approve
their plan, they would punish the public by withdrawing from markets.

That's very clearly a political power play decision that has
little to do with the ACA, but all about profits.

> It is broken and it needs to be fixed.

Oh, I've never disputed that there's things within the ACA
that need work - - but that doesn't justify blowing it all up.
That's why the CBO's analysis last month said that the current
"repeal and forget to replace" plan will result in 20-25%/year
rate increases.

> If you have something specific you want to refute, then do
> so succinctly. I'm not gonna read a damn term paper.

Nope.

Now that you realize that you were trapped like a rat, you're
trying to not play the game anymore. Its too late.

The real reason why you don't want to respond to a "Term Paper"
is because it closed off your plausible excuses before you
could even try to use them. All your escape hatches belong to us.



-hh