Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Omnibus GOP Primary ThreadFollow

#1152 Apr 07 2012 at 7:03 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

The problem is that the media is so far in the tank for the Dems


The media is in the tank for controversy. They don't care who wins an election, so long as it's a colorful election. Given the "scary mormon" adds I've previewed at some of them DEM superpacs, I expect it's going to be colorful!

Something to look forward to.

You idiots nominated a Mormon. Do you know how trivial it is to get evangelicals to stay home rather than to go out and vote for a Mormon???

Fools.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#1153 Apr 07 2012 at 7:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
gbaji wrote:
2. A system where there are nearly no small private doctors offices. All medicine is doled out in large health care centers where you must file a stack of paperwork just to get a bump looked at, and it can easily take several hours of waiting for anything but an extreme emergency. Most of the centers require health insurance which costs thousands of dollars a year. If you don't have it, you *might* be able to see a doctor, but they're going to charge you many times more than what it would cost in the first system.
Is this how you think universal healthcare works? No wonder you're against it, you have on idea what it actually is.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#1154 Apr 07 2012 at 8:14 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,564 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
gbaji wrote:
2. A system where there are nearly no small private doctors offices. All medicine is doled out in large health care centers where you must file a stack of paperwork just to get a bump looked at, and it can easily take several hours of waiting for anything but an extreme emergency. Most of the centers require health insurance which costs thousands of dollars a year. If you don't have it, you *might* be able to see a doctor, but they're going to charge you many times more than what it would cost in the first system.
Is this how you think universal healthcare works? No wonder you're against it, you have on idea what it actually is.


Ya i mentioned that the last time gibberish boy tried to tell us why the vast majority of the first world was wrong. Even though they all pay less per person, and have access to better care.

He has no clue what he is talking about. **** he doesn't even understand how the current system works.
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#1155 Apr 07 2012 at 8:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Screenshot
.
#1156 Apr 07 2012 at 12:15 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
Not only are there a bajillion General Practicioners (Family Doctors) in small private practices practically everywhere there are people in Australia*, I've also called one out to visit me at home at 10:30 at night, which the taxpayer kindly refunded most of the visit for.

I tend to be able to pay doctors upfront and get an immediate government refund, these days. When I was younger and poorer, I generally signed a doctor's bill and they sent it in to Medicare (Fed. gov. agency), which cut a cheque directly to the private doctor, meaning I didn't have to pay myself sometime during the line. Now that Medicare has gone all direct debit on the refund-to-patients process, I don't know if they still use cheques or not to pay doctors.

*Outback doctors tend to be substandard, non-existent, or have closed patient books. But then there usually aren't any services of any kind in the Outback except petrol stations and pubs.

Edited, Apr 7th 2012 2:17pm by Aripyanfar
#1157 Apr 07 2012 at 1:16 PM Rating: Excellent
****
9,395 posts
Gbaji wrote:
2. A system where there are nearly no small private doctors offices. All medicine is doled out in large health care centers where you must file a stack of paperwork just to get a bump looked at, and it can easily take several hours of waiting for anything but an extreme emergency. Most of the centers require health insurance which costs thousands of dollars a year. If you don't have it, you *might* be able to see a doctor, but they're going to charge you many times more than what it would cost in the first system.


How about:

3. A system where there are both private doctors and those in public centers. Medicine is doled out without any paperwork(sometimes one form or two having to do with a specific test or condition) being necessary. Most of the centers are open to the public and free of charge, no health insurance necessary, some smaller centers and private offices are open only to the patients of the specific doctors working there, but are still free of charge and paperwork free. In emergencies, there are ERs in the hospitals, which are also paperwork free, and free of charge. No one is prevented from receiving health care.
____________________________
10k before the site's inevitable death or bust

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#1158 Apr 08 2012 at 12:18 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
Oo, oo, then there was that time I was 8 and I had a fever. I got up in the middle of the night and went to the toilet, then started hallucinating that I was on the moon and there was no atmosphere. I shrieked the neighbourhood down for two or three minutes before my parents got to me and shook me and shook me and yelled enough to get me to finally snap out of the hallucination and stop screaming. They called a doctor out at what had to have been 2 or 3 am. It was the Flu.
#1159 Apr 09 2012 at 7:54 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

The problem is that the media is so far in the tank for the Dems


The media is in the tank for controversy.
But it's a convenient scapegoat when things aren't going your way. "Oh, it's the media's fault our guy isn't as liked as he should be because of the other guy!"
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1160 Apr 09 2012 at 7:59 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

The problem is that the media is so far in the tank for the Dems


The media is in the tank for controversy.


Yes. But they are also in the tank for the Dems.

Quote:
They don't care who wins an election, so long as it's a colorful election.


Wrong. They absolutely care who wins an election, and for most of them, it's the Dems they want to win. They usually accomplish this by repeating any colorful thing that comes along that makes the Dems look good or the GOP look back with the minimum amount of fact checking possible.

Quote:
Given the "scary mormon" adds I've previewed at some of them DEM superpacs, I expect it's going to be colorful!


Uh huh. Case in point.

How about not pretending you don't know exactly why the overwhelming majority of the media will repeat and hype scary claims about Mormons (or whatever else comes along) this time around, but downplayed the Birther thing in the last election, and the Rev Wright thing, and the Aires thing, and a veritable laundry list of things that they *could* have made into colorful and scary stories for mass consumption but magically choose not to when it was a black Democrat running.

Quote:
You idiots nominated a Mormon. Do you know how trivial it is to get evangelicals to stay home rather than to go out and vote for a Mormon???


Far less trivial than it is to get liberals to think that it'll be trivial to get evangelicals to stay home rather than vote for a Morman. Delusion works in all directions Smash. But then you know that.

Quote:
Fools.


They should have expected the Spanish Inquisition, obviously!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#1161 Apr 09 2012 at 8:00 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
I've always said fox news is a left wing organization.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#1162 Apr 10 2012 at 12:15 AM Rating: Good
Inorite?

At least CNN and MSNBC have a few conservative pundits/newscasters. As far as I can tell, Fox News has no liberal anything besides the occasional guest, and they never let them finish their sentences anyways. There are some liberal pundits who are guilty of this too of course, and it annoys me. In fact, that's one of the reasons I like Rachel Maddow so much. She doesn't yell or scream, and she doesn't interrupt people. There are other reasons I like her of course, but those are two things that make her really stand out as a pundit. I really liked Keith Olbermann for a long time, until he started showing what an *** he was, and began acting like a liberal version of Bill O'Reilley.
#1163 Apr 10 2012 at 7:46 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
Fox News doesn't count because Republicans are always right.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1164 Apr 10 2012 at 8:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Wokka-wokka-wokka!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1165 Apr 10 2012 at 8:02 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,826 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Fox News doesn't count because Republicans are always right.


What you did there, I see it.
#1166 Apr 10 2012 at 10:13 AM Rating: Good
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
Inorite?

At least CNN and MSNBC have a few conservative pundits/newscasters. As far as I can tell, Fox News has no liberal anything besides the occasional guest, and they never let them finish their sentences anyways. There are some liberal pundits who are guilty of this too of course, and it annoys me. In fact, that's one of the reasons I like Rachel Maddow so much. She doesn't yell or scream, and she doesn't interrupt people. There are other reasons I like her of course, but those are two things that make her really stand out as a pundit. I really liked Keith Olbermann for a long time, until he started showing what an *** he was, and began acting like a liberal version of Bill O'Reilley.


That's one reason I adore her, too. I recall one show where she called someone out for lying, and warned she wasn't going to dress it up in pretty terms like "misunderstanding." She looked straight at the camera, and like a kindergarten teacher said, "This is what we call lyyinnnng."

Edited, Apr 10th 2012 12:33pm by catwho
#1167 Apr 10 2012 at 10:27 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,471 posts
I can't stand Maddow. She's obnoxiously condescending.
#1168 Apr 10 2012 at 10:35 AM Rating: Excellent
Eske Esquire wrote:
I can't stand Maddow. She's obnoxiously condescending.


She has a PhD in politics from Oxford. She's allowed to be a little condescending, at least.
#1169 Apr 10 2012 at 12:55 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,140 posts
Santorum dropped out of the race today.
LInk
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#1170 Apr 10 2012 at 12:57 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
I, for one, did not see that coming at all.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1171 Apr 10 2012 at 1:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
There's been rumors of it for the past few days. Santorum's Pennsylvania numbers were collapsing and Romney/Super PAC were prepping massive ad buys across the state.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#1172 Apr 10 2012 at 1:36 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Does it count as rumors when everyone not in the media crying for ratings knew what was going to happen?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#1173 Apr 10 2012 at 2:36 PM Rating: Good
Eske Esquire wrote:
I can't stand Maddow. She's obnoxiously condescending.


I've never taken that from watching her, but my girl crush might be a bit too strong for me to see any negative qualities. Smiley: grin
#1174 Apr 10 2012 at 2:56 PM Rating: Good
***
2,826 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
I can't stand Maddow. She's obnoxiously condescending.


I've never taken that from watching her, but my girl crush might be a bit too strong for me to see any negative qualities. Smiley: grin


She looks like Matthew Perry decided to have a sex change and started taking the pre-op hormones.
#1175 Apr 10 2012 at 3:22 PM Rating: Good
And naturally a person's attractiveness determines how good of a news anchor/pundit they are? Smiley: tongue I like androgynous people, and she is definitely more on the butch side than the femme side. That's probably at least part of the reason I have a bit of a crush.
#1176 Apr 10 2012 at 3:27 PM Rating: Good
***
2,826 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
And naturally a person's attractiveness determines how good of a news anchor/pundit they are? Smiley: tongue I like androgynous people, and she is definitely more on the butch side than the femme side. That's probably at least part of the reason I have a bit of a crush.


I was referring more to you referring to her as your "girl crush", which to me usually means somebody you'd be attracted to. Although I suppose you could be attracted to her for reasons other than looks.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 12 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (12)